SUMMARIES OF SELECTED STATEMENTS 2014-25. REFUSED ACCESS TO DISCREPANCY REPORT FOR A FEATURE FILM’S PAYROLL AND PRODUCTION ACCOUNTS A journalist had asked The Danish Film Institute for access to the discrepancy report regarding the production accounts for a feature film. The discrepancy report appeared in an e-mail correspondence between the Institute and the film company which had produced the feature film. The Danish Film Institute gave the journalist the discrepancy report but ‒ as did the Ministry of Culture subsequently ‒ with reference to section 30(i) and (ii) of the Access to Public Administration Files Act, the Institute exempted from access information on salaries to the film production’s employees, the amount of the co-producers’ funding of the film, sales revenues and the distribution of the film’s development costs. In the opinion of the authorities, this was information partly on the private, including financial, circumstances of individuals (section 30(i) of the Act) and partly on business matters the disclosure of which would result in a risk of financial damage for particularly the film company (section 30(ii) of the Act). The journalist then complained to the Ombudsman who did not find any grounds for criticising that the authorities had exempted the information from access. The Ombudsman emphasised that, according to available information, the authorities had made a concrete assessment of the nature of the information, and for the information exempted pursuant to section 30(ii) the authorities had likewise made a concrete assessment of whether or not public access to that information would result in a risk of financial damage. In addition, in light of the circumstances of the case, the Ombudsman could not criticise that the Danish Film Institute had not obtained a statement from the film company before making the decision. However, the Ombudsman did find it relevant to make some general comments on the practice of The Danish Film Institute, including the meaning of the rule of presumption mentioned in the explanatory notes for section 30(ii) of the Access to Public Administration Files Act. I. MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT No statements on cases concluded in 2014 have been published. 127