Changeflow GovPing Data Privacy & Cybersecurity Bristol City Council FOI s41(2) Upheld, Fresh R...
Priority review Enforcement Amended Final

Bristol City Council FOI s41(2) Upheld, Fresh Response Required

Favicon for ico.org.uk ICO Decision Notices
Filed
Detected
Email

Summary

The Information Commissioner's Office has upheld a complaint against Bristol City Council, finding that the Council improperly relied on section 41(2) of the Freedom of Information Act (information provided in confidence) to neither confirm nor deny whether it holds information falling within the scope of a request concerning allegations of misleading the courts, perjury, and related matters. The Commissioner requires the Council to issue a fresh response under section 1 of FOIA without relying upon section 41(2) for neither confirm nor deny purposes. If the Council holds relevant information, it must either disclose it or issue a refusal notice complying with section 17, specifying any exemptions relied upon.

“The Commissioner's decision is that the Council was not entitled to rely on section 41(2) of FOIA to neither confirm nor deny whether it holds information falling within the scope of the request.”

ICO , verbatim from source
Published by ICO on ico.org.uk . Detected, standardized, and enriched by GovPing. Review our methodology and editorial standards .

About this source

The Information Commissioner's Office is the UK's data protection and freedom of information authority. Decision notices are the formal written outcomes of ICO investigations into complaints against public authorities for Freedom of Information Act compliance. Around 230 decisions a month, each naming the authority, request details, whether the request was upheld, partially upheld, or rejected, and any remedial action ordered. Decision notices are a rich vein of information about UK government transparency and often reveal what specific requests ICO considers legitimate. Watch this if you file FOI requests in the UK, advise public authorities on disclosure obligations, or research information rights case law.

Notice an inaccuracy or want this record removed? Email corrections@changeflow.com . We respond within 48 hours and honor reasonable requests. See our editorial standards .

What changed

The ICO found that Bristol City Council was not entitled to rely on section 41(2) of FOIA to neither confirm nor deny whether it holds information about allegations of misleading the courts, perjury, and related issues. The Council must now issue a fresh response that either confirms or denies holding the information, and if held, must disclose or issue a compliant refusal notice under section 17.

Public authorities subject to FOIA should review their use of section 41(2) to neither confirm nor deny whether they hold information. This exemption for information provided in confidence must be carefully applied and cannot be used as a blanket refusal to engage with information requests.

What to do next

  1. Issue a fresh response to the request as required by section 1 of FOIA, without relying upon section 41(2) to neither confirm or deny whether it holds relevant information
  2. If information is held, either disclose it or issue a refusal notice that complies with section 17 of FOIA, specifying any exemptions relied upon and providing reasons for doing so

Archived snapshot

Apr 28, 2026

GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.

Bristol City Council

  • Date 24 April 2026
  • Sector Local government
  • Decision(s) FOI 41(2): Upheld The complainant submitted a request to Bristol City Council (“the Council”) seeking access to reports, investigations, internal documents, and correspondence about allegations of misleading the courts, perjury, and related issues. The Council refused to confirm or deny whether it holds the requested information, relying on section 41(2) of FOIA (information provided in confidence). The Commissioner’s decision is that the Council was not entitled to rely on section 41(2) of FOIA to neither confirm nor deny whether it holds information falling within the scope of the request. The Commissioner requires the Council to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. To issue a fresh response to the request as required by section 1 of FOIA, without relying upon section 41(2) to neither confirm or deny (“NCND”) whether it holds relevant information, and, If it holds information, to either disclose it or issue a refusal notice that complies with section 17 of FOIA, specifying any exemptions relied upon and (where required) providing its reasons for doing so.

Named provisions

Section 41(2) Section 1 FOIA Section 17 FOIA

Get daily alerts for ICO Decision Notices

Daily digest delivered to your inbox.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

About this page

What is GovPing?

Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission

What's from the agency?

Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from ICO.

What's AI-generated?

The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.

Last updated

Classification

Agency
ICO
Filed
April 24th, 2026
Instrument
Enforcement
Branch
Executive
Legal weight
Binding
Stage
Final
Change scope
Substantive
Docket
IC-412564-S2X2

Who this affects

Applies to
Government agencies
Industry sector
9211 Government & Public Administration
Activity scope
FOI response compliance Information access requests
Geographic scope
United Kingdom GB

Taxonomy

Primary area
Data Privacy
Operational domain
Compliance
Compliance frameworks
GDPR
Topics
Freedom of Information

Get alerts for this source

We'll email you when ICO Decision Notices publishes new changes.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

You're subscribed!