Information Commissioner's Office

Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council

4 January 2018, Local government (Borough council)

The complainant has requested polling and similar information regarding a proposed housing stock transfer. The London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham (“LBHF”) refused to provide it citing section 36(2)(c) (prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs) as its basis for doing so. It upheld this at internal review. Since the request, LBHF has changed its position regarding the proposed housing stock transfer. In correspondence with the Commissioner, it maintained its position with regard to section 36(2)(c) and also introduced reliance on section 40(2) (unfair disclosure of personal data) for some of the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that by the time of the internal review, LBHF was entitled to rely on section 40(2) in respect of the personal data contained in the information it held within the scope of the request. However, it was no longer entitled to reply on section 36(2)(c) as its basis for refusing to provide the remainder. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Disclose the information within the scope of the request which is not personal data and which is not exempt from disclosure by virtue of section 40(2). The public authority must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.

FOI 36: Upheld FOI 40: Not upheld