University of Surrey

The complainant has requested information about an alleged misconduct investigation. The above public authority relied on section 31 of FOIA (law enforcement) in order to withhold the requested information. The Commissioner’s decision is that: the public authority should have relied upon section 40(5B) of FOIA to refuse to confirm or deny whether it held information within the scope of part [1] of the request. He now applies this exemption himself, proactively, to prevent any further disclosure of personal information; and on the balance of probabilities, the public authority holds more information within the scope of part [2] of the request than it has identified to the Commissioner; and of the information that the public authority has identified as falling within the scope of part [2] of the request, the public authority is not entitled to rely on section 31 of FOIA to withhold it; and the Commissioner considers that some of that information is the personal information of either the complainant or of third parties. He has therefore applied sections 40(1) and 40(2) himself, proactively, to prevent further disclosure of personal information. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation: Disclose the information identified in the confidential annex; and Provide a fresh response to part [2] of the request, based on the interpretation set out in paragraph 24 of this decision.