ICO Decision Notice: Cornwall Council EIR Complaints

ICO Decision Notices

Filed February 5th, 2026

Detected February 14th, 2026

Summary

The UK's Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) issued a decision notice regarding complaints against Cornwall Council concerning the Environmental Information Regulations (EIR). The ICO found that while the council disclosed all requested information, it failed to do so within the statutory timeframe and that its internal review was late.

View original document View source feed page

What changed

The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has issued a decision notice (Ref: IC-389046-S7H4) concerning Cornwall Council's handling of a request made under the Environmental Information Regulations (EIR). The complainant sought information regarding tree works. Although Cornwall Council eventually disclosed all the information it held, the ICO found that the disclosure was not made in a timely manner, constituting a breach of regulation 5(2) of the EIR. Furthermore, the ICO determined that the council's internal review process was also late, breaching regulation 11(4).

While the ICO has not required Cornwall Council to take further steps beyond the disclosures already made, this decision serves as a reminder to public authorities of their obligations under the EIR regarding timely responses and internal reviews. Compliance officers within local government should ensure their processes for handling information requests and internal reviews adhere strictly to the regulatory timeframes to avoid similar findings of non-compliance.

What to do next

Review internal procedures for handling EIR requests to ensure timely disclosure.
Verify that internal review processes for EIR requests meet regulatory deadlines.

Source document (simplified)

Cornwall Council

Date 5 February 2026
Sector Local government
Decision(s) EIR 11(4): Upheld, EIR 5(2): Upheld The complainant requested information about tree works carried out on a specific road. Cornwall Council (the “council”) refused the request but revised its position during the Commissioner’s investigation and disclosed information to the complainant. The complainant asked the Commissioner to determine whether the council disclosed all the information it holds. The Commissioner’s decision is that the council disclosed all the requested information it holds but that it failed to do this in time, breaching regulation 5(2). He also finds that the council’s internal review was late and that it breached regulation 11(4). The Commissioner does not require the council to take further steps.