FOISA Education Council incorrectly relies on confidentiality exemption

The Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA) gives individuals the right to ask for, and be given, any kind of recorded information from public authorities in Scotland. However, public authorities have the right to refuse an information request in certain circumstances, including when the information is exempt under FOISA. An exemption commonly used by public authorities is that of confidential information – as was the case in circumstances surrounding the recent decision of the Scottish Information Commissioner (SIC). FOISA provides that information is exempt if it was obtained by a Scottish public authority from another person and its disclosure to the public would constitute a breach of confidence actionable by that person.

What happened?

An individual named Mr Brown made an information request under FOISA to the Scottish Further and Higher Education Funding Council (SFC). Mr Brown had requested the names of individuals who had been interviewed in relation to a report (prepared on behalf of the SFC) on the governance procedures of a college following suspension of the college’s principal. The SFC withheld the names of the interviewees, relying on the FOISA exemptions of confidentiality and personal information.

Mr Brown asked the SFC to review their decision (as he was entitled to do under FOISA), but the SFC decided to continue to withhold the information. If an individual has already been through the two steps of making a request and requesting a review and are still not happy, they can then appeal to the SIC – as Mr Brown did in this case.

The SFC argued that the verbal assurances on confidentiality were given to interviewees at the outset of interviews and therefore the exemption of confidentiality applied. Mr Brown accepted that the information obtained from the interviews may be confidential but that the names of the interviewees were not, and pointed out that the report stated that “SFC reserves to publish the report in whole or in part”.

What did the SIC say?

The SIC found that the SFC wrongly relied on the confidentiality exemption:

  • The SIC’s decision noted that a redacted version of the report was in the public domain, and although the interviewees’ names were not provided outright, the report made reference to titles such as “The Chair” – so, at least some information in relation to the identities of some of the interviewees was in the public domain. However, the SIC conceded that most of the interviewees’ names were in fact of a confidential nature.
  • The SIC’s reasoning for finding that the exemption didn’t apply was based on its finding that there was no ongoing obligation to maintain confidentiality as the interviewees held positions within the college which made them likely to be interviewed.
  • Interestingly, the SIC did not consider the personal information exemption also applied by the SFC, and one wonders whether this exemption would have been upheld. The SIC has, however, created guidance on this exemption (available here) which suggests that the ‘seniority’ of a person’s role is a consideration for public authorities when deciding to apply the personal information exemption.

Public interest: The SIC decision notes that the confidentiality exemption under FOISA is an ‘absolute’ exemption and, therefore, a public authority does not need to consider the public interest test (which many of the other exemptions are). However, the SIC also points out in its decision that it is generally accepted at common law that an obligation of confidence will not be enforced if disclosure of the information is necessary in the public interest. From this, perhaps the SIC is attempting to dilute the ‘absoluteness’ of this FOISA exemption and imply a public interest qualification – although this is clear as the SIC does not then go on to apply the test in its decision.

What can public authorities learn from this?
  • If you want to safeguard the confidential nature of information then be careful about what information you circulate and put in the public domain.
  • Be careful in relation to who you provide undertakings of confidentiality. In this decision, the SIC found that there was no obligation to maintain confidentiality as the interviewees held certain roles which made them likely to be interviewed.
  • While it is not clear why the SIC referred to the common law public interest test, it could be seen as an indication that the qualification is to apply to the FOISA confidentiality exemption.

This article was co-written by Melissa Hendrie.

Latest updates from @MacRoberts

  • Yesterday, the Government announced much-needed measures to support self-employed workers through this period of un… https://t.co/qJvw9jMWbs 27/03/2020
  • Have you caught up with our latest #Employment #Law & #HR Update webinars? Listen now for an overview of recent inf… https://t.co/VbLYFF1BjW 27/03/2020
  • In these uncertain and challenging times, #caveats are a sensible step for peace of mind & risk management for all… https://t.co/D5gbb42nIQ 27/03/2020
  • Do you have questions about the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme? Our #Employment #Law team looks at the key points… https://t.co/iGNopWPPzQ 27/03/2020
  • Do you have questions about how COVID-19 will impact your business? Our dedicated hub seeks to provide answers to s… https://t.co/tMZ4g8RqIl 27/03/2020
  • This week has seen everyone at MacRoberts make the transition to #workingfromhome in order to safely continue to pr… https://t.co/m7tsMBnIQE 27/03/2020
  • As organisations readjust their working practices within the context of COVID-19, we look at the status and importa… https://t.co/XPOAvnpWVy 26/03/2020
  • Another day of #LockdownLife down: we are checking in with our team members regularly to make sure everyone is doin… https://t.co/IXKyD65rpQ 26/03/2020
  • Do you have questions about how COVID-19 will impact your business? Our team answers some of the most frequently as… https://t.co/J19yrHqtvx 26/03/2020
  • The Government has set out a number of measures designed to support businesses through COVID-19 disruption, namely… https://t.co/aMgmu3kR5n 25/03/2020
  • We are continuing to provide our clients with expert legal advice during these challenging times, and everyone at M… https://t.co/YaJ6CQojog 25/03/2020
  • How could a #caveat help you? In these uncertain and challenging times, having a caveat in place can ensure… https://t.co/nZ0tbecskX 24/03/2020
  • Everyone at MacRoberts is working from home & we will continue to provide our clients with expert legal advice duri… https://t.co/UaIZMXrs3x 24/03/2020
  • MacRoberts is here to support you, your families & your businesses: Our guide contains answers to some of the most… https://t.co/PGXzegaT3P 24/03/2020
  • On Friday, the Government announced a new #Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme to provide support for #employers and… https://t.co/Eya9WIna6H 23/03/2020