Dicconson Group Practice

In three requests, the complainant has requested information about references that a doctor at Dicconson Group Practice (DGP) made in correspondence, and information about the redaction of Practice meeting minutes. In its response, DGP indicated that it holds no relevant information. The Commissioner’s decision is that: DGP breached section 1(1)(a) with regard to requests [1] and [2] but, on the balance of probabilities, has complied with section 1(1)(b) with regard to all three requests. DGP breached section 10(1) as it did not comply with section 1(1) within 20 working days. The Commissioner does not require DGP to take any steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Information Tribunal appeal EA/2018/0182 allowed in part.