BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
Information Commissioner's Office |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Information Commissioner's Office >> Department for Work and Pensions (Decision Notice) [2013] UKICO FS50430962 (12 February 2013) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKICO/2013/FS50430962.html Cite as: [2013] UKICO FS50430962 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Summary: The complainant requested the name and qualifications of the individuals who reviewed his case following his appeal against an incapacity benefit assessment. He has also requested the name of the company who conducted the review. The assessment was performed by Atos Healthcare (-Atos-) on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions (the -DWP-) and the review was conducted by a company known as the Independent Tier (the -IT-). The Commissioner-s decision is that, in the circumstances of this case, the names of the individuals and the company are the complainant-s personal data. Therefore the DWP was not obliged to comply with section 1(1)(a) of the FOIA in relation to that information by virtue of section 40(5)(a). This information should have been considered for disclosure under the Data Protection Act 1998 (the -DPA-). The information about the individuals- qualifications is not the complainant-s personal data and therefore has been considered under the FOIA. The Commissioner has determined that the qualifications of the assessor are not held for the purposes of the FOIA. The doctor-s qualifications are held by Atos on behalf of the DWP in accordance with section 3(2)(b). The Commissioner is however satisfied that the DWP was correct to refuse to provide that information on the basis that it is exempt under section 40(2)(b). It is the doctor-s personal data and disclosure would, in the Commissioner-s view, breach the first data protection principle. The Commissioner has suggested that as a matter of good practice the DWP should consider making further general information publicly available about the minimum qualification requirements for those involved in incapacity benefit assessment reviews but no remedial steps are required. This decision notice is currently under appeal to the Information Tribunal.
Section of Act/EIR & Finding: FOI 1 - Complaint Not upheld, FOI 40 - Complaint Not upheld
