FOI/EIR 25/26-510-The Old Dispensary, Ely

Business Rates information on The Old Dispensary, Ely

Received 29 January 2026

Please provide the following information in relation to The Old Dispensary, 13 St Mary's Street, Ely, CB7 4ER:

  1. Whether the property is currently recorded by East Cambridgeshire District Council as a non-domestic (rateable) property for the purposes of business rates.
  2. The date from which the property was first treated as liable for business rates, following its change of use to office accommodation.
  3. The current business rates status of the property, including whether it is:
    a) occupied, or
    b) unoccupied but subject to empty property rates.
  4. Details of any business rates reliefs or exemptions applied to the property since 2023, including:
    • the type of relief or exemption,
    • the period for which it was applied.

  5. The Rateable Value of the property as used by the Council for billing purposes, and the effective date of that valuation.

    Responded 24 February 2026

    East Cambridgeshire District Council confirms that we hold the requested information. However, guidance from the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) states that Business Rates data is considered to have been provided in confidence and is therefore exempt from disclosure.
    This information is therefore exempt from disclosure under Section 41(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. In respect of those requests that are answered in full, partially or the total refused, please take this as notice under FOIA, that we:
    a) Consider the information as exempt from disclosure under the Act.
    b) Claim exempt under sections of the Act:
    Section 41(1) Information Provided in Confidence
    c) State why the exemption applies:
    41(1) Information is exempt information if — (a) it was obtained by the public authority from any other person (including another public authority), and, (b) the disclosure of the information to the public (otherwise than under this Act) by the public authority holding it would constitute a breach of confidence actionable by that or any other person.
    Section 41(1)(a) of the FOI Act provides that information is exempt if it was obtained by the public authority from any other person (or company, local authority or any other legal entity) and disclosure of the information to the public by the public authority holding it, would constitute a breach of confidence. The information was provided to the Council from the Valuation Office and from the ratepayer themselves, and we consider that this information is provided in confidence. This applies to the account/company name of the liable party and the billing address, the account start/end date, details of if the property is currently subject to rate reliefs, the date from which any reliefs have been applied and their values including if the property has an occupied/empty status.

    Section 41(1)(a) requires that the information in question was obtained from any other person. The information in question has been obtained by us from owners, ratepayers, and third-party companies/agents, therefore we consider this part of the exemption satisfied.
    Section 41(1)(b) requires the disclosure by us to constitute an actionable breach of confidence. The information must have the necessary quality of confidence, and in our opinion it does. It is recognised in English law that an important duty of confidentiality is owed to tax and rate payers. This is what is known as “taxpayer confidentiality”. This is a long-established principle of common law, protecting taxpayers' affairs against disclosure to the public. We are satisfied that the requested information is not trivial, nor is it available by any other means and if we were to disclose the requested information ratepayers/their representatives could issue legal proceedings against us.
    Section 41 of the Freedom of Information Act confers an absolute exemption on disclosure and there is no public interest test to apply.

    Review Requested 25 February 2026

    Many thanks for your response to my FOI request (FOI/EIR 25/26-510), to which I now request an internal review.
    While I note the reliance on Section 41(1), I believe the exemption has been applied too broadly and without appropriate consideration of partial disclosure.
    In particular:
    1. My request included information that is not inherently confidential, including:
    Rateable Values which are published by the Valuation Office Agency and are therefore not confidential:
    o whether the property is recorded as rateable
    o the Rateable Value
    o and the date from which liability arose
    2. The response does not appear to consider whether non-sensitive elements of the requested information could be disclosed with redactions (as required under FOIA).
    3. It is unclear how disclosure of high-level factual information (such as whether a property is liable for business rates, or whether it is currently recorded as occupied or empty) would constitute an actionable breach of confidence.
    I would therefore ask the Council to please reconsider the request and provide:
    • any information that is not genuinely confidential
    • with redactions applied where necessary
    If you continue to rely on Section 41, please provide a more specific explanation of:
    • which exact elements are considered confidential
    • how the test of an actionable breach of confidence is met for each
    I also note that the Valuation Office Agency currently lists the property as “hall and premises”, which appears inconsistent with its permitted office use. This raises a legitimate question as to whether the Council’s business rates treatment aligns with both the VOA rating list and the authorised use of the property.
    In this context, I do not accept that confirming the property’s rating status, liability date, or whether it is treated as occupied or empty would constitute an actionable breach of confidence, particularly where elements of the underlying information are already publicly available via the VOA.

    Review Responded 25 March 2026

    1. The property is currently recorded by East Cambridgeshire District Council as a non-domestic (rateable) property for business rates. This information is also available via other means at: Find a business rates valuation - GOV.UK.

    2. The property is listed as ‘Hall and Premises’, this information is also available via other means at: Find a business rates valuation - GOV.UK. Our business rate records go back to 01/04/2010, the property has been non-domestic rated since at least then.
    3. b - The property is currently unoccupied. As stated at: Business rates relief: Empty property relief - GOV.UK, listed buildings are continuously exempt from Business Rates whilst vacant.
    4. The premises became unoccupied as of 31.03.2024, and, as stated at: Business rates relief: Empty property relief - GOV.UK, it has been in receipt of 100% empty relief since then. Details of business rates reliefs or exemptions applied to the property from 2023 to 31.03.2024 are being withheld under FOI Act 2000 exemption Section 41(1) - Information Provided in Confidence. Please see below.
    5. This information is available via other means at: Find a business rates valuation - GOV.UK. The rateable value was £1,900 from 01.04.2010 to 01.04.2023. £2,600 from 01.04.2023 to 31.03.2026. £3,100 will be the rateable value from 01.04.2026.
    Q4. Exemption:
    Section 41(1) of the FOI Act 2000 states:
    Information is exempt information if –
    It was obtained by the public authority from any other person (including another public authority),
    and
    The disclosure of the information to the public (otherwise that und
    er this Act) by the public authority holding it would constitute a breach of confidence actionable by that or any other person.
    The Council receives all of its business rates information from two external sources:
    • the Valuation Office Agency (VOA), for information relating to the property and its value. The VOA is responsible for providing specific property information necessary for billing as set out in the Local Government Finance Act 1988 and provides weekly updates of any amendments to the property rating list, and;
    • the ratepayers, to advise on the name of the business, the dates it took occupation of the premises, any circumstances that might entitle the business to financial relief and anything else that contributes to the effective creation and management of billing.
    The Council considers the First tier (Information Rights) Tribunal decision on appeal EA/2018/00551 which considered whether information provided to authorities in respect of non-domestic rates could be confidential for the purposes of section 41 of the FOIA. It was concluded in that appeal that information provided to public authorities for the purpose of calculating rates or reliefs is information which the public would expect to be information provided in confidence.
    The Tribunal also considered that the information has the necessary quality of confidence. It is considered that releasing the information could be utilised by third parties for those third parties’ purposes, including unsolicited purposes, and would result in a loss of control to rate payers over the information they have provided to the Council. There could also be a risk of damage to the businesses concerned. It is therefore concluded that there could be an actionable breach of confidence.
    Section 41 (1) of the FOIA is an absolute exemption which is not subject to a public interest test. However, it is necessary to consider if there is an overriding public interest in disclosure of confidential information: Releasing information would demonstrate to the public at large that the Council has identified appropriate ratepayers for each property, has charged each ratepayer correctly, and has taken action to collect unpaid liabilities and administer the non-domestic rates account properly. Releasing information may benefit some individuals, groups or organisations who have a personal or other interest, and some information may already be in the public domain.
    In the appeal EA/2018/00551 it was concluded that: “there is only a limited public interest in disclosure of this information, and consequently we conclude that there is insufficient public interest in disclosure to outweigh the importance of the general common law principle of taxpayer confidentiality.” There should be significant public interest factors present in order to override the strong public interest in maintaining confidentiality. The Council, therefore, considers that the public interest in protecting the principle of tax-payer confidentiality overrides the benefits of disclosing the information.
    In coming to this decision, the Council has also considered the Information Commissioner’s Office’s decisions IC-265932-F0Y0, IC-264793-Q3L7 and ic-316240-r3n1.pdf.