Derby City Council

The complainant requested information from Derby City Council (“the Council”) about a footpath by the River Derwent. The Council provided some information, but stated that some information was not held. It also refused two parts of the request under regulation 12(4)(b) – manifestly unreasonable, on grounds of the burden of cost and time. The Commissioner is satisfied that the Council does not hold any information falling within the scope of part 3) of the request. However, he is not satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that the Council does not hold more information relating to part 1). He has also found that the exception at regulation 12(4)(b) is not engaged, in respect of parts 2) and 4) of the request. Further, the Commissioner has found that the Council breached the requirements of regulations 5(2), 14(2) and 11(4): time for response and refusal notice, and time for reconsideration (internal review). The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Provide a fresh response to part 1) after carrying out further searches aimed at identifying all the information it holds within scope. The Commissioner stresses that the Council must consider the specific request and ensure that it responds. If the Council locates relevant information and decides to apply a new exception, it must clearly communicate this to the complainant. If, following searches, the Council wishes to maintain its position that no further information is held, it must be able to clearly demonstrate that it has performed adequate searches before arriving at this conclusion. Provide a fresh response to parts 2) and 4) of the request that does not rely on regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR.