<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Current Awareness &#187; freedom of information</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/category/freedom-of-information/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com</link>
	<description>from the Inner Temple Library</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 13:08:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
		<item>
		<title>Closed material and closed proceedings in FOIA litigation: authoritative guidance from the Upper Tribunal &#8211; Panopticon</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/closed-material-and-closed-proceedings-in-foia-litigation-authoritative-guidance-from-the-upper-tribunal-panopticon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/closed-material-and-closed-proceedings-in-foia-litigation-authoritative-guidance-from-the-upper-tribunal-panopticon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 14:07:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[closed material]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribunals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=83862</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Closed material and closed proceedings are commonplace in FOIA litigation. As regards the disputed information itself, the need is self-explanatory. But what about closed material other than the disputed information, such as evidence in support of a public authority’s reliance on exemptions? To what extent is it appropriate for FOIA proceedings to be determined by [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Closed material and closed proceedings are commonplace in FOIA litigation. As regards the disputed information itself, the need is self-explanatory. But what about closed material other than the disputed information, such as evidence in support of a public authority’s reliance on exemptions? To what extent is it appropriate for FOIA proceedings to be determined by reference to such material which the requester is unable to see and challenge? Also, if the public authority’s concern is with public disclosure of such material, is the solution to be found in a readiness to bring the requester’s legal representatives into a ‘confidentiality ring’? In other words, do natural and open justice demand that requesters’ legal representatives be allowed to attend the closed part of the hearing and see the closed material?&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/2013/05/22/closed-material-and-closed-proceedings-in-foia-litigation-authoritative-guidance-from-the-upper-tribunal/?utm_source=feedly">Full story</a></p>
<p>Panopticon, 22nd May 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com">www.panopticonblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/closed-material-and-closed-proceedings-in-foia-litigation-authoritative-guidance-from-the-upper-tribunal-panopticon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Police swabbing of child DNA excessive, says charity &#8211; BBC News</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/police-swabbing-of-child-dna-excessive-says-charity-bbc-news/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/police-swabbing-of-child-dna-excessive-says-charity-bbc-news/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 08:57:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[children]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DNA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[police]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reports]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=83818</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Police in England and Wales have taken DNA samples from children every 10 minutes, figures obtained using freedom of information requests suggest.&#8221; Full story BBC News, 20th May 2013 Source: www.bbc.co.uk]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Police in England and Wales have taken DNA samples from children every 10 minutes, figures obtained using freedom of information requests suggest.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22595835">Full story</a></p>
<p>BBC News, 20th May 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk">www.bbc.co.uk</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/police-swabbing-of-child-dna-excessive-says-charity-bbc-news/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Workfare and the First-tier Tribunal &#8211; Panopticon</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/workfare-and-the-first-tier-tribunal-panopticon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/workfare-and-the-first-tier-tribunal-panopticon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 08:46:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribunals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=83815</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Employment programmes for welfare recipients – often referred to as &#8216;workfare&#8217; – are highly controversial. In Department for Work and Pensions v Information Commissioner and Zola (EA/2012/0207,0232 and 0233), the First-tier Tribunal considered three FOIA requests for information about companies participating in such programmes. The Tribunal ordered disclosure, rejecting the Department’s reliance on the exemptions [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Employment programmes for welfare recipients – often referred to as &#8216;workfare&#8217; – are highly controversial.  In Department for Work and Pensions v Information Commissioner and Zola (EA/2012/0207,0232 and 0233), the First-tier Tribunal considered three FOIA requests for information about companies participating in such programmes.  The Tribunal ordered disclosure, rejecting the Department’s reliance on the exemptions in FOIA section 43(2) (prejudice to commercial interests) and section 36(2)(c) (prejudice to the effect conduct of public affairs).&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/2013/05/20/workfare-and-the-first-tier-tribunal/">Full story</a></p>
<p>Panopticon, 20th May 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com">www.panopticonblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/workfare-and-the-first-tier-tribunal-panopticon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ICO updates guidance on dealing with vexatious FOI requests following Tribunal criticism &#8211; OUT-LAW.com</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/ico-updates-guidance-on-dealing-with-vexatious-foi-requests-following-tribunal-criticism-out-law-com/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/ico-updates-guidance-on-dealing-with-vexatious-foi-requests-following-tribunal-criticism-out-law-com/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 17:37:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[proportionality]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=83729</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Public bodies should consider whether freedom of information (FOI) requests are &#8216;likely to cause a disproportionate or unjustified level of disruption, irritation or distress&#8217; when determining whether those requests are vexatious or not, the Information Commissioner&#8217;s Office (ICO) has said.&#8221; Full story OUT-LAW.com, 16th May 2013 Source: www.out-law.com]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Public bodies should consider whether freedom of information (FOI) requests are &#8216;likely to cause a disproportionate or unjustified level of disruption, irritation or distress&#8217; when determining whether those requests are vexatious or not, the Information Commissioner&#8217;s Office (ICO) has said.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2013/may/ico-updates-guidance-on-dealing-with-vexatious-foi-requests-following-tribunal-criticism/">Full story</a></p>
<p>OUT-LAW.com, 16th May 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.out-law.com">www.out-law.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/ico-updates-guidance-on-dealing-with-vexatious-foi-requests-following-tribunal-criticism-out-law-com/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Attorney General &#8216;wrong to overrule judges who ordered Government to publish letters Prince Charles wrote to ministers&#8217; &#8211; The Independent</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/attorney-general-wrong-to-overrule-judges-who-ordered-government-to-publish-letters-prince-charles-wrote-to-ministers-the-independent/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/attorney-general-wrong-to-overrule-judges-who-ordered-government-to-publish-letters-prince-charles-wrote-to-ministers-the-independent/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 May 2013 08:57:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tracey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[attorney general]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[documents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[royal family]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=83529</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;The Attorney General Dominic Grieve got the law wrong when he overruled judges who ordered the government to publish letters Prince Charles wrote to ministers, a court heard today.&#8221; Full story The Independent, 8th May 2013 Source: www.independent.co.uk]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The Attorney General Dominic Grieve got the law wrong when he overruled judges who ordered the government to publish letters Prince Charles wrote to ministers, a court heard today.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/attorney-general-wrong-to-overrule-judges-who-ordered-government-to-publish-letters-prince-charles-wrote-to-ministers-8608254.html">Full story</a></p>
<p>The Independent, 8th May 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk">www.independent.co.uk</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/attorney-general-wrong-to-overrule-judges-who-ordered-government-to-publish-letters-prince-charles-wrote-to-ministers-the-independent/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>EIR: when is information ‘held’? &#8211; Panopticon</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/eir-when-is-information-held-panopticon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/eir-when-is-information-held-panopticon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 08:59:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electronic mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribunals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[universities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=83510</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;One of the issues which commonly arises for information law practitioners is the question, which arises under both FOIA and the EIR, of whether a public authority actually holds the information which has been requested. The leading case on section 1(1) FOIA is University of Newcastle v IC &#038; British Union for the Abolition of [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;One of the issues which commonly arises for information law practitioners is the question, which arises under both FOIA and the EIR, of whether a public authority actually holds the information which has been requested. The leading case on section 1(1) FOIA is University of Newcastle v IC &#038; British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection [2011] UKUT 185 (AAC), [2011] 2 Info LR 54 and substantially the same approach has been adopted in, for example, Keiller v IC and University of East Anglia [2012] 1 Info LR 128 and Clyne v IC &#038; London Borough of Lambeth [2012] 2 Info LR 24 in relation to regulation 3(2) EIR. What is required is a common-sense and non-technical approach. That, of course, is easier stated than applied.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/2013/05/07/eir-when-is-information-held/">Full story</a></p>
<p>Panopticon, 7th May 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com">www.panopticonblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/eir-when-is-information-held-panopticon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mentally-ill patients were &#8216;Tasered&#8217; more than 50 times &#8211; The Independent</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/mentally-ill-patients-were-tasered-more-than-50-times-the-independent/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/mentally-ill-patients-were-tasered-more-than-50-times-the-independent/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 08:32:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[care homes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mental health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[police]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[weapons]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=83505</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Freedom of Information request reveals extent of stun-gun use by police in psychiatric wards.&#8221; Full story The Independent, 7th May 2013 Source: www.independent.co.uk]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Freedom of Information request reveals extent of stun-gun use by police in psychiatric wards.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/mentallyill-patients-were-tasered-more-than-50-times-8606726.html">Full story</a></p>
<p>The Independent, 7th May 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk">www.independent.co.uk</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/mentally-ill-patients-were-tasered-more-than-50-times-the-independent/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Who “holds” the working papers of the Climategate inquiry? &#8211; UK Human Rights Blog</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/who-holds-the-working-papers-of-the-climategate-inquiry-uk-human-rights-blog/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/who-holds-the-working-papers-of-the-climategate-inquiry-uk-human-rights-blog/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 May 2013 10:16:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[environmental health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribunals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[universities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=83485</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;In 2009 someone hacked into e-mails belonging to the Climate Research Unit at UEA and leaked them widely. Climate change sceptics whooped with delight because they thought that the e-mails showed attempts to suppress or gerrymander climate data (see e.g. this example from James Delingpole with some of the ticklish e-mails, and for more background, [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;In 2009 someone hacked into e-mails belonging to the Climate Research Unit at UEA and leaked them widely. Climate change sceptics whooped with delight because they thought that the e-mails showed attempts to suppress or gerrymander climate data (see e.g. this example from James Delingpole with some of the ticklish e-mails, and for more background, less tendentiously put, my post on an earlier UEA case). And the CRU data was important; it had made its way into the highly influential IPCC reports.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2013/05/07/who-holds-the-working-papers-of-the-climategate-inquiry/">Full story</a></p>
<p>UK Human Rights Blog, 7th May 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.ukhumanrightsblog.com">www.ukhumanrightsblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/05/who-holds-the-working-papers-of-the-climategate-inquiry-uk-human-rights-blog/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MPs’ expenses: copies of receipts are subject to FOIA &#8211; Panopticon</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/04/mps-expenses-copies-of-receipts-are-subject-to-foia-panopticon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/04/mps-expenses-copies-of-receipts-are-subject-to-foia-panopticon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:14:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[documents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[expenses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parliament]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=83360</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Following the MPs’ expenses scandal, the then newly-founded Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) decided that it would not routinely publish images of the receipts submitted to IPSA by MPs in support of their expenses claims. Rather, only text transcribed from the submitted receipts was to be published.&#8221; Full story Panopticon, 29th April 2013 Source: www.panopticonblog.com]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Following the MPs’ expenses scandal, the then newly-founded Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) decided that it would not routinely publish images of the receipts submitted to IPSA by MPs in support of their expenses claims.  Rather, only text transcribed from the submitted receipts was to be published.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/2013/04/29/mps-expenses-copies-of-receipts-are-subject-to-foia/">Full story</a></p>
<p>Panopticon, 29th April 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com">www.panopticonblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/04/mps-expenses-copies-of-receipts-are-subject-to-foia-panopticon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Home Office faces legal action unless it reveals details of &#8216;Snooper&#8217;s charter&#8217; &#8211; Daily Telegraph</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/04/home-office-faces-legal-action-unless-it-reveals-details-of-snoopers-charter-daily-telegraph/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/04/home-office-faces-legal-action-unless-it-reveals-details-of-snoopers-charter-daily-telegraph/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 09:56:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bills]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government departments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telecommunications]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=83142</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;The Home Office is facing legal action unless it reveals key details of its so-called Snooper’s Charter.&#8221; Full story Daily Telegraph, 20th April 2013 Source: www.telegraph.co.uk]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The Home Office is facing legal action unless it reveals key details of its so-called Snooper’s Charter.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10007940/Home-Office-faces-legal-action-unless-it-reveals-details-of-Snoopers-charter.html">Full story</a></p>
<p>Daily Telegraph, 20th April 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk">www.telegraph.co.uk</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/04/home-office-faces-legal-action-unless-it-reveals-details-of-snoopers-charter-daily-telegraph/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>FSA was right to refuse FOI request, rules watchdog &#8211; OUT-LAW.com</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/04/fsa-was-right-to-refuse-foi-request-rules-watchdog-out-law-com/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/04/fsa-was-right-to-refuse-foi-request-rules-watchdog-out-law-com/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 09:03:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[data protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=83035</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;The former City regulator, the Financial Services Authority, was right not to disclose information it held about a company it had investigated based on freedom of information (FOI) legislation carve outs, the Information Commissioner has ruled.&#8221; Full story OUT-LAW.com, 16th April 2013 Source: www.out-law.com]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The former City regulator, the Financial Services Authority, was right not to disclose information it held about a company it had investigated based on freedom of information (FOI) legislation carve outs, the Information Commissioner has ruled.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2013/april/fsa-was-right-to-refuse-foi-request-rules-watchdog/">Full story</a></p>
<p>OUT-LAW.com, 16th April 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.out-law.com">www.out-law.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/04/fsa-was-right-to-refuse-foi-request-rules-watchdog-out-law-com/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Justice Committee and the Information Commissioner &#8211; Panopticon</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/03/the-justice-committee-and-the-information-commissioner-panopticon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/03/the-justice-committee-and-the-information-commissioner-panopticon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Mar 2013 10:01:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[data protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reports]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[select committees]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=82656</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;On 21st March 2013 the House of Commons Justice Committee published a report (HC 962) on the functions, powers and resources of the Information Commissioner. It is essential reading for anyone interested in understanding the current role and future prospects of the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).&#8221; Full story Panopticon, 25th March 2013 Source: www.panopticonblog.com]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;On 21st March 2013 the House of Commons Justice Committee published a report (HC 962) on the functions, powers and resources of the Information Commissioner.  It is essential reading for anyone interested in understanding the current role and future prospects of the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/2013/03/25/the-justice-committee-and-the-information-commissioner/">Full story</a></p>
<p>Panopticon, 25th March 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com">www.panopticonblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/03/the-justice-committee-and-the-information-commissioner-panopticon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Press regulation: publishers may have grounds for legal challenge &#8211; The Guardian</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/03/press-regulation-publishers-may-have-grounds-for-legal-challenge-the-guardian/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/03/press-regulation-publishers-may-have-grounds-for-legal-challenge-the-guardian/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2013 10:01:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tracey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[costs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[damages]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defamation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[publishing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=82549</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Newspapers likely to take action over regulations that will require huge payouts when stories are wrong.&#8221; Full story The Guardian, 19th March 2013 Source: www.guardian.co.uk]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Newspapers likely to take action over regulations that will require huge payouts when stories are wrong.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/mar/19/press-regulation-pressandpublishing">Full story</a></p>
<p>The Guardian, 19th March 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">www.guardian.co.uk</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/03/press-regulation-publishers-may-have-grounds-for-legal-challenge-the-guardian/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8216;Ill-judged and offensive&#8217; Hillsborough police email slammed by watchdog &#8211; Daily Telegraph</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/02/ill-judged-and-offensive-hillsborough-police-email-slammed-by-watchdog-daily-telegraph/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/02/ill-judged-and-offensive-hillsborough-police-email-slammed-by-watchdog-daily-telegraph/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:49:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[electronic mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[police]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reports]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=82109</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;The police watchdog has written to a chief constable expressing concern over comments in an email about the Hillsborough disaster that were &#8216;at best ill-judged and at worst offensive and upsetting&#8217;.&#8221; Full story Daily Telegraph, 26th February 2013 Source: www.telegraph.co.uk]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The police watchdog has written to a chief constable expressing concern over comments in an email about the Hillsborough disaster that were &#8216;at best ill-judged and at worst offensive and upsetting&#8217;.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/9894482/Ill-judged-and-offensive-Hillsborough-police-email-slammed-by-watchdog.html">Full story</a></p>
<p>Daily Telegraph, 26th February 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk">www.telegraph.co.uk</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/02/ill-judged-and-offensive-hillsborough-police-email-slammed-by-watchdog-daily-telegraph/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tribunal sets out new guidance on determining whether FOI requests are &#8216;vexatious&#8217; &#8211; OUT-LAW.com</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/02/tribunal-sets-out-new-guidance-on-determining-whether-foi-requests-are-vexatious-out-law-com/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/02/tribunal-sets-out-new-guidance-on-determining-whether-foi-requests-are-vexatious-out-law-com/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2013 10:48:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribunals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=81886</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Whether a freedom of information (FOI) request is &#8216;vexatious&#8217; or not will depend on the burden of meeting the request; the motive of requesters; the value or serious purpose of requests, and any harassment or distress caused, an Information Rights Tribunal has said.&#8221; Full story OUT-LAW.com, 13th February 2013 Source: www.out-law.com]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Whether a freedom of information (FOI) request is &#8216;vexatious&#8217; or not will depend on the burden of meeting the request; the motive of requesters; the value or serious purpose of requests, and any harassment or distress caused, an Information Rights Tribunal has said.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2013/february/tribunal-sets-out-new-guidance-on-determining-whether-foi-requests-are-vexatious-/">Full story</a></p>
<p>OUT-LAW.com, 13th February 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.out-law.com">www.out-law.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/02/tribunal-sets-out-new-guidance-on-determining-whether-foi-requests-are-vexatious-out-law-com/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Vexatious and manifestly unreasonable requests: definitive guidance from the Upper Tribunal &#8211; Panopticon</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/02/vexatious-and-manifestly-unreasonable-requests-definitive-guidance-from-the-upper-tribunal-panopticon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/02/vexatious-and-manifestly-unreasonable-requests-definitive-guidance-from-the-upper-tribunal-panopticon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2013 10:01:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vexatious litigants]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=81758</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Public authorities often have cause to consider whether to treat requests for information as vexatious (section 14 of FOIA) or manifestly unreasonable (regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR). Precise definitions of those terms are difficult to pin down. They are not supplied by legislation. There is no binding authority from appellate courts or tribunals on their [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Public authorities often have cause to consider whether to treat requests for information as vexatious (section 14 of FOIA) or manifestly unreasonable (regulation 12(4)(b) of the EIR). Precise definitions of those terms are difficult to pin down. They are not supplied by legislation. There is no binding authority from appellate courts or tribunals on their meaning in the information rights context. The Information Commissioner’s guidance is long-standing, but First-Tier Tribunals vary in the extent to which they use that guidance.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/2013/02/07/vexatious-and-manifestly-unreasonable-requests-definitive-guidance-from-the-upper-tribunal/">Full story</a></p>
<p>Panopticon, 7th February 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com">www.panopticonblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/02/vexatious-and-manifestly-unreasonable-requests-definitive-guidance-from-the-upper-tribunal-panopticon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Personal data: it’s all in the name &#8211; Panopticon</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/02/personal-data-its-all-in-the-name-panopticon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/02/personal-data-its-all-in-the-name-panopticon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2013 10:27:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[data protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribunals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=81724</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;A person’s name constitutes his or her personal data – so has held the Upper Tribunal recently in Information Commissioner v Financial Services Authority &#038; Edem [2012] UKUT 464 (AAC).&#8221; Full story Panopticon, 7th February 2013 Source: www.panopticonblog.com]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;A person’s name constitutes his or her personal data – so has held the Upper Tribunal recently in Information Commissioner v Financial Services Authority &#038; Edem [2012] UKUT 464 (AAC).&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/2013/02/07/personal-data-its-all-in-the-name/">Full story</a></p>
<p>Panopticon, 7th February 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com">www.panopticonblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/02/personal-data-its-all-in-the-name-panopticon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Information &#8216;reasonably accessible&#8217; despite hefty charge &#8211; Panopticon</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/02/information-reasonably-accessible-despite-hefty-charge-panopticon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/02/information-reasonably-accessible-despite-hefty-charge-panopticon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2013 10:46:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tracey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[fees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statistics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=81595</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;In Davis v ICO and Health and Social Care Information Centre (case no. EA/2012/0175, judgment 24 January 2013) the First-Tier Tribunal applied the absolute exemption under section 21 of FOIA 2000 for information which is reasonably accessible to an applicant other than under section 1. The requested information consisted of health statistics which the public [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;In Davis v ICO and Health and Social Care Information Centre (case no. EA/2012/0175, judgment 24 January 2013) the First-Tier Tribunal applied the absolute exemption under section 21 of FOIA 2000 for information which is reasonably accessible to an applicant other than under section 1. The requested information consisted of health statistics which the public authority was willing to provide to the appellant under its publication scheme for a charge of £1,550. The appellant argued that the charge meant the information could not be considered to be reasonably accessible to a person of ordinary means.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/">Full story</a></p>
<p>Panopticon, 31st January 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/">www.panopticonblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/02/information-reasonably-accessible-despite-hefty-charge-panopticon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ministers consider clampdown on &#8216;industrial users&#8217; of Freedom of Information &#8211; BBC News</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/01/ministers-consider-clampdown-on-industrial-users-of-freedom-of-information-bbc-news/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/01/ministers-consider-clampdown-on-industrial-users-of-freedom-of-information-bbc-news/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 19:24:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[local government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=81416</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;The government is considering how to curb repetitive and overly expensive Freedom of Information requests, a justice minister has said.&#8221; Full story BBC News, 24th January 2013 Source: www.bbc.co.uk]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The government is considering how to curb repetitive and overly expensive Freedom of Information requests, a justice minister has said.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21187250">Full story</a></p>
<p>BBC News, 24th January 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk">www.bbc.co.uk</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/01/ministers-consider-clampdown-on-industrial-users-of-freedom-of-information-bbc-news/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Prisoners win big payouts for parole delays &#8211; The Independent</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/01/prisoners-win-big-payouts-for-parole-delays-the-independent/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/01/prisoners-win-big-payouts-for-parole-delays-the-independent/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2013 09:37:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[compensation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[delay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parole]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prisons]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=81336</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Murderers, rapists and kidnappers have received compensation totalling hundreds of thousands of pounds from the Government after complaining that delays in their parole hearings breached their human rights.&#8221; Full story The Independent, 20th January 2013 Source: www.independent.co.uk]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Murderers, rapists and kidnappers have received compensation totalling hundreds of thousands of pounds from the Government after complaining that delays in their parole hearings breached their human rights.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/prisoners-win-big-payouts-for-parole-delays-8458769.html">Full story</a></p>
<p>The Independent, 20th January 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk">www.independent.co.uk</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/01/prisoners-win-big-payouts-for-parole-delays-the-independent/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pamphlet on Royal consent legislation published &#8211; The Independent</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/01/pamphlet-on-royal-consent-legislation-published-the-independent/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/01/pamphlet-on-royal-consent-legislation-published-the-independent/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 10:02:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Crown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[royal prerogative]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=81265</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Official legal advice about when Royal consent is required for legislation to proceed has been published after a long-running battle by the Cabinet Office to keep it under wraps.&#8221; Full story The Independent, 15th January 2013 Source: www.independent.co.uk Related link: Queen&#8217;s or Prince&#8217;s Consent (PDF)]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Official legal advice about when Royal consent is required for legislation to proceed has been published after a long-running battle by the Cabinet Office to keep it under wraps.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/pamphlet-on-royal-consent-legislation-published-8452548.html">Full story</a></p>
<p>The Independent, 15th January 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk">www.independent.co.uk</a></p>
<p>Related link: <a href="http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/sites/default/files/resources/QC_PC_pamphlet_191212.pdf">Queen&#8217;s or Prince&#8217;s Consent</a> (PDF)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/01/pamphlet-on-royal-consent-legislation-published-the-independent/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Secret papers show extent of senior royals&#8217; veto over bills &#8211; The Guardian</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/01/secret-papers-show-extent-of-senior-royals-veto-over-bills-the-guardian/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/01/secret-papers-show-extent-of-senior-royals-veto-over-bills-the-guardian/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 2013 09:35:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bills]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[constitutional law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[documents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[royal family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[veto]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=81251</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;The extent of the Queen and Prince Charles&#8217;s secretive power of veto over new laws has been exposed after Downing Street lost its battle to keep information about its application secret.&#8221; Full story The Guardian, 14th January 2013 Source: www.guardian.co.uk]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The extent of the Queen and Prince Charles&#8217;s secretive power of veto over new laws has been exposed after Downing Street lost its battle to keep information about its application secret.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jan/14/secret-papers-royals-veto-bills">Full story</a></p>
<p>The Guardian, 14th January 2013</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">www.guardian.co.uk</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2013/01/secret-papers-show-extent-of-senior-royals-veto-over-bills-the-guardian/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Universities and requests for lecturers’ private research: when will it be “held” by the University? &#8211; Panopticon</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/12/universities-and-requests-for-lecturers-private-research-when-will-it-be-held-by-the-university-panopticon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/12/universities-and-requests-for-lecturers-private-research-when-will-it-be-held-by-the-university-panopticon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2012 10:37:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tracey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[electronic mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[universities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=80899</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;The First-Tier Tribunal’s decision of 13 December 2012 in Montague v (1) Information Commissioner (2) Liverpool John Moores University EA/2012/0109 will be of interest to academic institutions, and any other public bodies whose employees have research interests not necessarily connected with their job. Anya Proops of 11KBW appeared for the University.&#8221; Full story Panopticon, 13th [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The First-Tier Tribunal’s decision of 13 December 2012 in <em>Montague v (1) Information Commissioner (2) Liverpool John Moores University </em>EA/2012/0109 will be of interest to academic institutions, and any other public bodies whose employees have research interests not necessarily connected with their job. Anya Proops of 11KBW appeared for the University.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/2012/12/13/universities-and-requests-for-lecturers-private-research-when-will-it-be-held-by-the-university/">Full story</p>
<p></a></p>
<p>Panopticon, 13th December 2012</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com">www.panopticonblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/12/universities-and-requests-for-lecturers-private-research-when-will-it-be-held-by-the-university-panopticon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Redacting for anonymisation: Article 8 v Article 10 in child protection context &#8211; Panopticon</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/12/redacting-for-anonymisation-article-8-v-article-10-in-child-protection-context-panopticon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/12/redacting-for-anonymisation-article-8-v-article-10-in-child-protection-context-panopticon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Dec 2012 09:26:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[anonymity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[data protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=80865</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Panopticon has reported recently on the ICO’s new Code of Practice on Anonymisation: see Rachel Kamm’s post here. That Code offers guidance for ensuring data protection-compliant disclosure in difficult cases such as those involving apparently anonymous statistics, and situations where someone with inside knowledge (or a ‘motivated intruder’) could identify someone referred to anonymously in [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Panopticon has reported recently on the ICO’s new Code of Practice on Anonymisation: see Rachel Kamm’s post here. That Code offers guidance for ensuring data protection-compliant disclosure in difficult cases such as those involving apparently anonymous statistics, and situations where someone with inside knowledge (or a ‘motivated intruder’) could identify someone referred to anonymously in a disclosed document. The Upper Tribunal in Information Commissioner v Magherafelt District Council [2012] UKUT 263 AAC grappled with those issues earlier this year in the context of disclosing a summarised schedule of disciplinary action.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/2012/12/13/redacting-for-anonymisation-article-8-v-article-10-in-child-protection-context/">Full story</a></p>
<p>Panopticon, 13th December 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com">www.panopticonblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/12/redacting-for-anonymisation-article-8-v-article-10-in-child-protection-context-panopticon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New code of practice for disclosure of datasets under FOI proposed &#8211; OUT-LAW.com</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/12/new-code-of-practice-for-disclosure-of-datasets-under-foi-proposed-out-law-com/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/12/new-code-of-practice-for-disclosure-of-datasets-under-foi-proposed-out-law-com/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Dec 2012 11:54:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[codes of practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=80685</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Public authorities required to disclose &#8216;datasets&#8217; in order to comply with a freedom of information (FOI) request should have to make sure the information is &#8216;machine readable&#8217; and accompanied by explanatory material, the Government has proposed.&#8221; Full story OUT-LAW.com, 3rd December 2012 Source: www.out-law.com]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Public authorities required to disclose &#8216;datasets&#8217; in order to comply with a freedom of information (FOI) request should have to make sure the information is &#8216;machine readable&#8217; and accompanied by explanatory material, the Government has proposed.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2012/december/new-code-of-practice-for-disclosure-of-datasets-under-foi-proposed/">Full story</a></p>
<p>OUT-LAW.com, 3rd December 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.out-law.com">www.out-law.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/12/new-code-of-practice-for-disclosure-of-datasets-under-foi-proposed-out-law-com/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Confidential bid information could be disclosed under FOI laws, rules Tribunal &#8211; OUT-LAW.com</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/confidential-bid-information-could-be-disclosed-under-foi-laws-rules-tribunal-out-law-com/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/confidential-bid-information-could-be-disclosed-under-foi-laws-rules-tribunal-out-law-com/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2012 11:10:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[confidentiality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public procurement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tenders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribunals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=80576</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Public sector bodies cannot guarantee the confidentiality of bid information in the aftermath of an Information Rights Tribunal ruling, an expert has said.&#8221; Full story OUT-LAW.com, 27th November 2012 Source: www.out-law.com]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Public sector bodies cannot guarantee the confidentiality of bid information in the aftermath of an Information Rights Tribunal ruling, an expert has said.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2012/november/confidential-bid-information-could-be-disclosed-under-foi-laws-rules-tribunal/">Full story</a></p>
<p>OUT-LAW.com, 27th November 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.out-law.com">www.out-law.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/confidential-bid-information-could-be-disclosed-under-foi-laws-rules-tribunal-out-law-com/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Update on Freedom of Information &#8211; 11 KBW</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/update-on-freedom-of-information-11-kbw/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/update-on-freedom-of-information-11-kbw/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2012 10:47:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[data protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electronic mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public interest]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=80539</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;This paper focuses on developments in the case law concerning freedom of information over roughly the last 12 months. The number of cases concerning freedom of information being decided has continued to grow at an exponential rate (in part due to successful efforts by the Information Commissioner (&#8216;the IC&#8217;) to get on top of the [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;This paper focuses on developments in the case law concerning freedom of information over roughly the last 12 months. The number of cases concerning freedom of information being decided has continued to grow at an exponential rate (in part due to successful efforts by the Information Commissioner (&#8216;the IC&#8217;) to get on top of the case backlog faced by his office). The Information Rights Tribunal (&#8216;the Tribunal&#8217;) website contains the outcomes of over 220 appeals since the beginning of 2012 alone – and the vast majority of these are substantive decisions. There have also been seven Upper Tribunal (&#8216;UT&#8217;) decisions, and one decision each from the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.11kbw.com/articles/docs/FOIAWSTalkJAC.pdf">Full story</a> (PDF)</p>
<p>11 KBW, 20th November 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.11kbw.com">www.11kbw.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/update-on-freedom-of-information-11-kbw/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Government threatens to legislate if voluntary consumer data access standards are not adhered to by mobile, energy and financial services firms &#8211; OUT-LAW.com</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/government-threatens-to-legislate-if-voluntary-consumer-data-access-standards-are-not-adhered-to-by-mobile-energy-and-financial-services-firms-out-law-com/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/government-threatens-to-legislate-if-voluntary-consumer-data-access-standards-are-not-adhered-to-by-mobile-energy-and-financial-services-firms-out-law-com/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2012 10:05:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[consumer protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[data protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[energy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[financial regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telecommunications]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=80388</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Financial services, mobile telecoms and energy companies will be compelled by law to provide consumers with data they hold about their transactions or consumption in an &#8216;electronic, machine readable&#8217; format, upon request, if they do not do so voluntarily, the Government has said.&#8221; Full story OUT-LAW.com, 20th November 2012 Source: www.out-law.com]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Financial services, mobile telecoms and energy companies will be compelled by law to provide consumers with data they hold about their transactions or consumption in an &#8216;electronic, machine readable&#8217; format, upon request, if they do not do so voluntarily, the Government has said.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2012/november/government-threatens-to-legislate-if-voluntary-consumer-data-access-standards-are-not-adhered-to-by-mobile-energy-and-financial-services-firms/">Full story</a></p>
<p>OUT-LAW.com, 20th November 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.out-law.com">www.out-law.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/government-threatens-to-legislate-if-voluntary-consumer-data-access-standards-are-not-adhered-to-by-mobile-energy-and-financial-services-firms-out-law-com/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Update on recent Tribunal decisions part 4: qualified exemptions and the public interest &#8211; Panopticon</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/update-on-recent-tribunal-decisions-part-4-qualified-exemptions-and-the-public-interest-panopticon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/update-on-recent-tribunal-decisions-part-4-qualified-exemptions-and-the-public-interest-panopticon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 10:28:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public interest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribunals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=80240</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;In the final part of our round-up of recent decisions of the First-Tier Tribunal, Panopticon looks at the qualified exemptions, the public interest and a few other loose ends.&#8221; Full story Panopticon, 13th November 2012 Source: www.panopticonblog.com]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;In the final part of our round-up of recent decisions of the First-Tier Tribunal, Panopticon looks at the qualified exemptions, the public interest and a few other loose ends.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/2012/11/13/update-on-recent-tribunal-decisions-part-4-qualified-exemptions-and-the-public-interest/">Full story</a></p>
<p>Panopticon, 13th November 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com">www.panopticonblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/update-on-recent-tribunal-decisions-part-4-qualified-exemptions-and-the-public-interest-panopticon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Update on recent Tribunal decisions part 3: personal data of public officials and relating to court proceedings &#8211; Panopticon</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/update-on-recent-tribunal-decisions-part-3-personal-data-of-public-officials-and-relating-to-court-proceedings-panopticon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/update-on-recent-tribunal-decisions-part-3-personal-data-of-public-officials-and-relating-to-court-proceedings-panopticon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 10:25:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[data protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribunals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=80239</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;I posted a few days ago about some recent decisions of the First-Tier Tribunal on requests under FOIA and the EIR for personal data. There have been a number of decisions on this issue of late. The following are of note, as they illustrate the types of issues very frequently encountered by public authorities. They [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I posted a few days ago about some recent decisions of the First-Tier Tribunal on requests under FOIA and the EIR for personal data. There have been a number of decisions on this issue of late. The following are of note, as they illustrate the types of issues very frequently encountered by public authorities. They also illustrate the nuanced and forensic approach taken by some Tribunals. There may not be a presumption in favour of disclosing personal data, but public authorities should beware assuming that Tribunals will be equally cautious about disclosing all types of personal data.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/2012/11/13/update-on-recent-tribunal-decisions-part-3-personal-data-of-public-officials-and-relating-to-court-proceedings/">Full story</a></p>
<p>Panopticon, 13th November 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com">www.panopticonblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/update-on-recent-tribunal-decisions-part-3-personal-data-of-public-officials-and-relating-to-court-proceedings-panopticon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Update on recent Tribunal decisions part 2: personal data of “low inherent sensitivity” &#8211; Panopticon</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/update-on-recent-tribunal-decisions-part-2-personal-data-of-low-inherent-sensitivity-panopticon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/update-on-recent-tribunal-decisions-part-2-personal-data-of-low-inherent-sensitivity-panopticon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 11:08:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tracey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[data protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribunals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=80144</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;The &#8216;personal data&#8217; provisions under s. 40(2) FOIA and regulation 13 EIR can often be very difficult to apply, particularly in light of the Durant &#8216;notions of assistance&#8217;, namely biographical significance and focus. It is correspondingly difficult to predict how such arguments will fare before the Tribunal. Two recent cases offer good illustrations. Both saw [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The &#8216;personal data&#8217; provisions under s. 40(2) FOIA and regulation 13 EIR can often be very difficult to apply, particularly in light of the <em>Durant</em> &#8216;notions of assistance&#8217;, namely biographical significance and focus. It is correspondingly difficult to predict how such arguments will fare before the Tribunal. Two recent cases offer good illustrations. Both saw the Tribunal order disclosure of property-related personal data which was deemed to be of &#8216;low inherent sensitivity.&#8217; &#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/">Full story</a></p>
<p>Panopticon, 8th November 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com">www.panopticonblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/update-on-recent-tribunal-decisions-part-2-personal-data-of-low-inherent-sensitivity-panopticon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Update on recent Tribunal decisions part 1: the evolving approach to vexatiousness and manifest unreasonableness &#8211; Panopticon</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/update-on-recent-tribunal-decisions-part-1-the-evolving-approach-to-vexatiousness-and-manifest-unreasonableness-panopticon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/update-on-recent-tribunal-decisions-part-1-the-evolving-approach-to-vexatiousness-and-manifest-unreasonableness-panopticon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Nov 2012 11:15:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[investigatory powers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reasons]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=80038</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;In recent months, the major information law issues have involved the government’s vetoing disclosure of the Prince Charles ‘black spider’ letters, its response to the draft new EU Data Protection Regulation, a number of Article 8 decisions concerning police and criminal records and changes to RIPA. On this last point, note that as of last [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;In recent months, the major information law issues have involved the government’s vetoing disclosure of the Prince Charles ‘black spider’ letters, its response to the draft new EU Data Protection Regulation, a number of Article 8 decisions concerning police and criminal records and changes to RIPA. On this last point, note that as of last Thursday, local authorities require a magistrate’s approval for authorising directed surveillance.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/2012/11/04/update-on-recent-tribunal-decisions-part-1-the-evolving-approach-to-vexatiousness-and-manifest-unreasonableness/">Full story</a></p>
<p>Panopticon, 4th November 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com">www.panopticonblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/11/update-on-recent-tribunal-decisions-part-1-the-evolving-approach-to-vexatiousness-and-manifest-unreasonableness-panopticon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Only smarties have the answer – collective cabinet responsibility and the sale of Rowntree Mackintosh &#8211; Panopticon</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/only-smarties-have-the-answer-collective-cabinet-responsibility-and-the-sale-of-rowntree-mackintosh-panopticon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/only-smarties-have-the-answer-collective-cabinet-responsibility-and-the-sale-of-rowntree-mackintosh-panopticon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2012 09:21:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government departments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[takeovers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=79812</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;The question of whether the convention on collective cabinet responsibility operates, in effect, as a trump card in the FOIA context has been considered in a number of tribunal cases (see further for example the Lamb case concerning a request for disclosure of the Iraq war cabinet minutes and the Cabinet Office case concerning cabinet [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The question of whether the convention on collective cabinet responsibility operates, in effect, as a trump card in the FOIA context has been considered in a number of tribunal cases (see further for example the Lamb case concerning a request for disclosure of the Iraq war cabinet minutes and the Cabinet Office case concerning cabinet discussions over the Westland takeover (&#8216;the Westland case&#8217;)). Last week, in Cabinet Office v IC, the First-Tier Tribunal handed down a decision in which it reconfirmed the principle that the convention, whilst undoubtedly an important consideration in the FOIA context, does not create any absolute bar against disclosure.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/2012/10/23/only-smarties-have-the-answer-collective-cabinet-responsibility-and-the-sale-of-rowntree-mackintosh/">Full story</a></p>
<p>Panopticon, 23rd October 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com">www.panopticonblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/only-smarties-have-the-answer-collective-cabinet-responsibility-and-the-sale-of-rowntree-mackintosh-panopticon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Prince Charles and the curious case of the Black Spider Letters &#8211; UK Human Rights Blog</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/prince-charles-and-the-curious-case-of-the-black-spider-letters-uk-human-rights-blog/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/prince-charles-and-the-curious-case-of-the-black-spider-letters-uk-human-rights-blog/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2012 08:44:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[constitutional law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public interest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[royal family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribunals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=79804</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Litigation relating to information rights can sometimes seem very dry and obscure, entailing lengthy analysis of the merits of public authorities disclosing or withholding information which is highly specialised or obtuse, and of little real interest to the general population. But this case – the case of the &#8216;Black Spider Letters&#8217; – really is a [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Litigation relating to information rights can sometimes seem very dry and obscure, entailing lengthy analysis of the merits of public authorities disclosing or withholding information which is highly specialised or obtuse, and of little real interest to the general population. But this case – the case of the &#8216;Black Spider Letters&#8217; – really is a fascinating one, involving an examination not just of the legislative provisions relating to the disclosure of information, but also a consideration of the existence and extent of constitutional conventions pertaining to the role of the monarchy in government. At the same time, it has the potential to generate such controversy as to make for perfect tabloid fodder. It has been the subject of international news coverage. And it’s not over yet.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2012/10/23/prince-charles-and-the-curious-case-of-the-black-spider-letters/">Full story</a></p>
<p>UK Human Rights Blog, 23rd October</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.ukhumanrightsblog.com">www.ukhumanrightsblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/prince-charles-and-the-curious-case-of-the-black-spider-letters-uk-human-rights-blog/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Attorney General vetoes release of Prince of Wales correspondence &#8211; Attorney General&#8217;s Office</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/attorney-general-vetoes-release-of-prince-of-wales-correspondence-attorney-generals-office/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/attorney-general-vetoes-release-of-prince-of-wales-correspondence-attorney-generals-office/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Oct 2012 12:04:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tracey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[attorney general]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[documents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[royal family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[speeches]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[veto]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=79639</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;The Attorney General today issued a certificate under the Freedom of Information Act, both as it applies for the purposes of the Act and as it applies to the Environmental Information Regulations 2004, vetoing the disclosure of correspondence between HRH the Prince of Wales and ministers in seven government departments.&#8221; Full statement Attorney General&#8217;s Office, [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The Attorney General today issued a certificate under the Freedom of Information Act, both as it applies for the purposes of the Act and as it applies to the Environmental Information Regulations 2004, vetoing the disclosure of correspondence between HRH the Prince of Wales and ministers in seven government departments.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.attorneygeneral.gov.uk/NewsCentre/Documents/Statement%20of%20Reasons%20Prince%20of%20Wales16.10.12.pdf">Full statement</a></p>
<p>Attorney General&#8217;s Office, 16th October 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.attorneygeneral.gov.uk">www.attorneygeneral.gov.uk</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/attorney-general-vetoes-release-of-prince-of-wales-correspondence-attorney-generals-office/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Information stored in electronic recycle bins is held for purposes of FOI disclosure, says watchdog &#8211; OUT-LAW.com</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/information-stored-in-electronic-recycle-bins-is-held-for-purposes-of-foi-disclosure-says-watchdog-out-law-com/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/information-stored-in-electronic-recycle-bins-is-held-for-purposes-of-foi-disclosure-says-watchdog-out-law-com/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2012 09:46:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[electronic mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government departments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[local government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=79556</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Public sector bodies will generally be required to disclose information even if it is stored in computer &#8216;recycle bins&#8217;, the Information Commissioner&#8217;s Office (ICO) has said.&#8221; Full story OUT-LAW.com, 12th October 2012 Source: www.out-law.com]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Public sector bodies will generally be required to disclose information even if it is stored in computer &#8216;recycle bins&#8217;, the Information Commissioner&#8217;s Office (ICO) has said.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2012/october/information-stored-in-electronic-recycle-bins-is-held-for-purposes-of-foi-disclosure-says-watchdog/">Full story</a></p>
<p>OUT-LAW.com, 12th October 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.out-law.com">www.out-law.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/information-stored-in-electronic-recycle-bins-is-held-for-purposes-of-foi-disclosure-says-watchdog-out-law-com/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Shrewsbury 24 case: Heath government discussed prosecution of union pickets &#8211; The Guardian</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/shrewsbury-24-case-heath-government-discussed-prosecution-of-union-pickets-the-guardian/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/shrewsbury-24-case-heath-government-discussed-prosecution-of-union-pickets-the-guardian/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2012 08:27:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[affray]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conspiracy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Criminal Cases Review Commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[industrial action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade unions]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=79515</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Documents released by the National Archives could be key factor in quashing 40-year-old convictions.&#8221; Full story The Guardian, 11th October 2012 Source: www.guardian.co.uk]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Documents released by the National Archives could be key factor in quashing 40-year-old convictions.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/oct/11/shrewsbury-24-heath-union-pickets">Full story</a></p>
<p>The Guardian, 11th October 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">www.guardian.co.uk</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/shrewsbury-24-case-heath-government-discussed-prosecution-of-union-pickets-the-guardian/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CPS admits to &#8216;inadvertent&#8217; disclosure of tuition fee protestors&#8217; data &#8211; OUT-LAW.com</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/cps-admits-to-inadvertent-disclosure-of-tuition-fee-protestors-data-out-law-com/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/cps-admits-to-inadvertent-disclosure-of-tuition-fee-protestors-data-out-law-com/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2012 10:59:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Crown Prosecution Service]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[data protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[demonstrations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=79340</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has apologised to hundreds of people after it &#8216;inadvertently disclosed&#8217; their names, dates of birth and other personal data in a document as part of its response to a freedom of information (FOI) request.&#8221; Full story OUT-LAW.com, 28th September 2012 Source: www.out-law.com]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has apologised to hundreds of people after it &#8216;inadvertently disclosed&#8217; their names, dates of birth and other personal data in a document as part of its response to a freedom of information (FOI) request.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2012/september/cps-admits-to-inadvertent-disclosure-of-tuition-fee-protestors-data/">Full story</a></p>
<p>OUT-LAW.com, 28th September 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.out-law.com">www.out-law.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/cps-admits-to-inadvertent-disclosure-of-tuition-fee-protestors-data-out-law-com/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Freedom of Information to include ministers&#8217; private texts &#8211; BBC News</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/freedom-of-information-to-include-ministers-private-texts-bbc-news/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/freedom-of-information-to-include-ministers-private-texts-bbc-news/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2012 09:01:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[electronic mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government departments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telecommunications]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=79318</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Emails from private accounts and texts sent by the prime minister and cabinet members could be accessible under the Freedom of Information Act (FOI).&#8221; Full story BBC News, 30th September 2012 Source: www.bbc.co.uk]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Emails from private accounts and texts sent by the prime minister and cabinet members could be accessible under the Freedom of Information Act (FOI).&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19775763">Full story</a></p>
<p>BBC News, 30th September 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk">www.bbc.co.uk</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/freedom-of-information-to-include-ministers-private-texts-bbc-news/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Police figures show corruption cases against 49 Met officers &#8211; The Guardian</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/police-figures-show-corruption-cases-against-49-met-officers-the-guardian/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/police-figures-show-corruption-cases-against-49-met-officers-the-guardian/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2012 08:34:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[complaints]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[corruption]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disciplinary procedures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[harassment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[police]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[professional conduct]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexual offences]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=79316</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Forty-nine Metropolitan police officers were suspended for corruption over a three-year period, with figures showing 15 cases were proven, 18 unproven and 16 ongoing.&#8221; Full story The Guardian, 29th September 2012 Source: www.guardian.co.uk]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Forty-nine Metropolitan police officers were suspended for corruption over a three-year period, with figures showing 15 cases were proven, 18 unproven and 16 ongoing.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/sep/29/police-figures-met-corruption-cases">Full story</a></p>
<p>The Guardian, 29th September 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">www.guardian.co.uk</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/10/police-figures-show-corruption-cases-against-49-met-officers-the-guardian/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>HRH the Prince of Wales: advocacy of an ordinary man &#8211; Panopticon</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/09/hrh-the-prince-of-wales-advocacy-of-an-ordinary-man-panopticon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/09/hrh-the-prince-of-wales-advocacy-of-an-ordinary-man-panopticon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2012 13:55:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government departments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public interest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[royal family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribunals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=79016</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;The Upper Tribunal’s judgment in Evans v IC and Others (Seven Government Departments) [2012] UKUT 313 (AAC) (Mr Justice Walker, Professor John Angel and Suzanne Cosgrave), handed down yesterday, has received extensive media coverage – unsurprisingly so, given the subject matter (Prince Charles’ correspondence with government departments) and the requester (Rob Evans of the Guardian). [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The Upper Tribunal’s judgment in Evans v IC and Others (Seven Government Departments) [2012] UKUT 313 (AAC) (Mr Justice Walker, Professor John Angel and Suzanne Cosgrave), handed down yesterday, has received extensive media coverage – unsurprisingly so, given the subject matter (Prince Charles’ correspondence with government departments) and the requester (Rob Evans of the Guardian). The judgment is stupendously long (65 pages, plus 3 open annexes). Here are the salient points.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/2012/09/19/hrh-the-prince-of-wales-advocacy-of-an-ordinary-man/">Full story</a></p>
<p>Panopticon, 19th September 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com">www.panopticonblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/09/hrh-the-prince-of-wales-advocacy-of-an-ordinary-man-panopticon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Prince Charles&#8217;s letters to ministers should be disclosed, judges rule &#8211; The Guardian</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/09/prince-charless-letters-to-ministers-should-be-disclosed-judges-rule-the-guardian/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/09/prince-charless-letters-to-ministers-should-be-disclosed-judges-rule-the-guardian/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2012 15:04:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[royal family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribunals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=78983</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;The government has for the first time been ordered to disclose copies of confidential letters that Prince Charles wrote to ministers.&#8221; Full story The Guardian, 18th September 2012 Source: www.guardian.co.uk]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The government has for the first time been ordered to disclose copies of confidential letters that Prince Charles wrote to ministers.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/sep/18/prince-charles-letters-ministers-judges">Full story</a></p>
<p>The Guardian, 18th September 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">www.guardian.co.uk</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/09/prince-charless-letters-to-ministers-should-be-disclosed-judges-rule-the-guardian/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Local authorities and NHS Trusts (1): compromise agreements, officers’ identities and gagging clauses &#8211; Panopticon</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/09/local-authorities-and-nhs-trusts-1-compromise-agreements-officers-identities-and-gagging-clauses-panopticon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/09/local-authorities-and-nhs-trusts-1-compromise-agreements-officers-identities-and-gagging-clauses-panopticon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2012 08:30:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[local government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=78907</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;From a FOIA perspective, local authorities and NHS Trusts have this in common: both frequently receive requests for details of compromise agreements and other details about individual officers’ employment and disciplinary records. Three recent cases before the Tribunal confirm the general trend that – absent case-specific and well-evidenced arguments – the Commissioner and Tribunal re [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;From a FOIA perspective, local authorities and NHS Trusts have this in common: both frequently receive requests for details of compromise agreements and other details about individual officers’ employment and disciplinary records. Three recent cases before the Tribunal confirm the general trend that – absent case-specific and well-evidenced arguments – the Commissioner and Tribunal re reluctant to order disclosure of such personal data, notwithstanding the context of public sector employees.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/2012/09/17/local-authorities-and-nhs-trusts-compromise-agreements-officers-identities-and-gagging-clauses/">Full story</a></p>
<p>Panopticon, 17th September 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com">www.panopticonblog.com</a></p>
<p>Related link: <a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/2012/09/17/local-authorities-and-nhs-trusts-2-unusual-appeals-ahead/">Local authorities and NHS Trusts (2): unusual appeals ahead</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/09/local-authorities-and-nhs-trusts-1-compromise-agreements-officers-identities-and-gagging-clauses-panopticon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Royal powers of veto over laws to be made public &#8211; The Independent</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/09/royal-powers-of-veto-over-laws-to-be-made-public-the-independent/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/09/royal-powers-of-veto-over-laws-to-be-made-public-the-independent/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Sep 2012 08:20:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tracey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parliament]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[royal family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[veto]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=78190</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Details of secret powers held by senior members of the Royal Family granting veto over Government legislation could me made public after a decision by the Information Commissioner.&#8221; Full story The Independent, 1st September 2012 Source: www.independent.co.uk]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Details of secret powers held by senior members of the Royal Family granting veto over Government legislation could me made public after a decision by the Information Commissioner.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/royal-powers-of-veto-over-laws-to-be-made-public-8100021.html">Full story</a></p>
<p>The Independent, 1st September 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk">www.independent.co.uk</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/09/royal-powers-of-veto-over-laws-to-be-made-public-the-independent/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Firms do not always need to delete personal data to comply with data protection rules, says ICO &#8211; OUT-LAW.com</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/08/firms-do-not-always-need-to-delete-personal-data-to-comply-with-data-protection-rules-says-ico-out-law-com/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/08/firms-do-not-always-need-to-delete-personal-data-to-comply-with-data-protection-rules-says-ico-out-law-com/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Aug 2012 09:34:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tracey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[data protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=78079</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Organisations can temporarily keep personal data records even when the information is no longer necessary for processing purposes, the UK&#8217;s data protection watchdog has said.&#8221; Full story OUT-LAW.com, 29th August 2012 Source: www.out-law.com]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Organisations can temporarily keep personal data records even when the information is no longer necessary for processing purposes, the UK&#8217;s data protection watchdog has said.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2012/august/firms-do-not-always-need-to-delete-personal-data-to-comply-with-data-protection-rules-says-ico/">Full story</a></p>
<p>OUT-LAW.com, 29th August 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.out-law.com">www.out-law.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/08/firms-do-not-always-need-to-delete-personal-data-to-comply-with-data-protection-rules-says-ico-out-law-com/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ICO issues guidance on disclosing employee personal data under FOI &#8211; OUT-LAW.com</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/08/ico-issues-guidance-on-disclosing-employee-personal-data-under-foi-out-law-com/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/08/ico-issues-guidance-on-disclosing-employee-personal-data-under-foi-out-law-com/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Aug 2012 09:31:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tracey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[data protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=78077</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Local authorities and other public bodies must ensure that disclosing personal data about their employees under UK freedom of information (FOI) laws is &#8216;necessary&#8217; even if they have established that it is &#8220;fair&#8221; to do so, a watchdog has said.&#8221; Full story OUT-LAW.com, 29th August 2012 Source: www.out-law.com]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Local authorities and other public bodies must ensure that disclosing personal data about their employees under UK freedom of information (FOI) laws is &#8216;necessary&#8217; even if they have established that it is &#8220;fair&#8221; to do so, a watchdog has said.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2012/august/ico-issues-guidance-on-disclosing-employee-personal-data-under-foi/">Full story</a></p>
<p>OUT-LAW.com, 29th August 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.out-law.com">www.out-law.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/08/ico-issues-guidance-on-disclosing-employee-personal-data-under-foi-out-law-com/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Consumers could win right to see data held on them &#8211; Daily Telegraph</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/08/consumers-could-win-right-to-see-data-held-on-them-daily-telegraph/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/08/consumers-could-win-right-to-see-data-held-on-them-daily-telegraph/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Aug 2012 08:42:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[consultations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumer protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[data protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=77868</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Supermarkets and internet firms could be forced to release sensitive personal information that they hold about customers, ministers have said.&#8221; Full story Daily Telegraph, 22nd August 2012 Source: www.telegraph.co.uk]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Supermarkets and internet firms could be forced to release sensitive personal information that they hold about customers, ministers have said.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9493260/Consumers-could-win-right-to-see-data-held-on-them.html">Full story</a></p>
<p>Daily Telegraph, 22nd August 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk">www.telegraph.co.uk</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/08/consumers-could-win-right-to-see-data-held-on-them-daily-telegraph/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Recent Developments in Information Law &#8211; 11 KBW</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/08/recent-developments-in-information-law-11-kbw/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/08/recent-developments-in-information-law-11-kbw/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2012 12:11:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[data protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EC law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=77782</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;This paper looks at various recent developments in information law, as follows: • Post-legislative scrutiny of the Freedom of Information Act; • Handling problem FOI requesters; • The Protection of Freedoms Act; • EU proposals for data protection reform; and • Other recent developments in data protection.&#8221; Full story 11 KBW, 17th August 2012 Source: [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;This paper looks at various recent developments in information law, as follows:<br />
• Post-legislative scrutiny of the Freedom of Information Act;<br />
• Handling problem FOI requesters;<br />
• The Protection of Freedoms Act;<br />
• EU proposals for data protection reform; and<br />
• Other recent developments in data protection.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.11kbw.com/articles/docs/InformationTPP.pdf">Full story</a></p>
<p>11 KBW, 17th August 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.11kbw.com">www.11kbw.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/08/recent-developments-in-information-law-11-kbw/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Privacy watchdog &#8220;not ready&#8221; to deal with cookie complaints, according to FOI request &#8211; OUT-LAW.com</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/08/privacy-watchdog-not-ready-to-deal-with-cookie-complaints-according-to-foi-request-out-law-com/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/08/privacy-watchdog-not-ready-to-deal-with-cookie-complaints-according-to-foi-request-out-law-com/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Aug 2012 10:22:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[complaints]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EC law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enforcement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ombudsmen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=77698</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;The Information Commissioner&#8217;s Office (ICO) has yet to begin investigating websites accused of breaking the new cookie laws, which came into force last year, because it does not yet have an investigative team in place.&#8221; Full story OUT-LAW.com, 20th August 2012 Source: www.out-law.com]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The Information Commissioner&#8217;s Office (ICO) has yet to begin investigating websites accused of breaking the new cookie laws, which came into force last year, because it does not yet have an investigative team in place.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2012/august/privacy-watchdog-not-ready-to-deal-with-cookie-complaints-according-to-foi-request/">Full story</a></p>
<p>OUT-LAW.com, 20th August 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.out-law.com">www.out-law.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/08/privacy-watchdog-not-ready-to-deal-with-cookie-complaints-according-to-foi-request-out-law-com/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Commercial prejudice: the importance of precise and limited redactions &#8211; Panopticon</title>
		<link>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/08/commercial-prejudice-the-importance-of-precise-and-limited-redactions-panopticon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/08/commercial-prejudice-the-importance-of-precise-and-limited-redactions-panopticon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Aug 2012 10:05:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sally</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[freedom of information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public interest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tribunals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/?p=77694</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;In the recent decision in UK Coal Mining v IC, Nottinghamshire County Council &#038; Veolia [2012] UKUT 212 AAC, the Upper Tribunal has dismissed an appeal concerned with section 43(2) of FOIA (commercial prejudice): the First-Tier Tribunal (decision EA/2010/0142, on which see our post here) had been entitled to find that only very limited redactions [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;In the recent decision in UK Coal Mining v IC, Nottinghamshire County Council &#038; Veolia [2012] UKUT 212 AAC, the Upper Tribunal has dismissed an appeal concerned with section 43(2) of FOIA (commercial prejudice): the First-Tier Tribunal (decision EA/2010/0142, on which see our post here) had been entitled to find that only very limited redactions could be made to provisions from a PFI contract for a waste incinerator. Upper Tribunal Judge Wikeley’s decision, while largely fact-specific, illustrates two significant points.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com/2012/08/17/commercial-prejudice-the-importance-of-precise-and-limited-redactions/">Full story</a></p>
<p>Panopticon, 17th August 2012</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.panopticonblog.com">www.panopticonblog.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.innertemplelibrary.com/2012/08/commercial-prejudice-the-importance-of-precise-and-limited-redactions-panopticon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
