Planning department correspondence - The Firs (FOI)

Request

Please provide all of the emails and reports, memos and a legal opinions sought (internal and external of the Planning Department, in particular the ones by the officer [name redacted] in regards [redacted] property known as the Firs or carpark.

Response

Please see the attached correspondence:

Correspondence _Redacted.pdf

Copies of the relevant documents are now available for you to view through a private Egress account, which is a secure document sharing platform.  Instructions on how to access Egress will follow shortly.

Personal information has been redacted in accordance with the Article 25 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011.   

Article 31 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 also applies to some of the aforesaid withheld documents.

Article 31 is a qualified exemption; therefore, a public interest test has been applied and is shown at the end of this response.

Articles applied  

Article 25 - Personal information  

(1) Information is absolutely exempt information if it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is the data subject as defined in the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005.  

(2) Information is absolutely exempt information if –  

(a) it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is not the data subject as defined in the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005; and  

(b) its supply to a member of the public would contravene any of the data protection principles, as defined in that Law. 

Article 31 - Advice by the Bailiff, Deputy Bailiff or a Law Officer

Information is qualified exempt information if it is or relates to the provision of advice by the Bailiff, Deputy Bailiff or the Attorney General or the Solicitor General.

Public Interest Test

The public interest in disclosing information when this article is being applied must weigh particularly heavily in favour of disclosure in order to outweigh the inherent right to privilege. 

It is not considered the public interest in disclosing the information is outweighed by that in maintaining the exemption, as it is designed to protect the constitutional Law Officer privilege.