Summaries of selected statements | 51 The Ombudsman recommended that the Ministry of Justice reopen the case and make a new decision in the light of what he had stated. the Act, under which access to information may be denied if non-disclosure is required because of the special nature of the matter. Ministry of Ecclesiastical Affairs On investigating the journalist’s complaint about the Ministry’s new decision, the Ombudsman stated that he had no grounds for criticising that the Ministry had denied access to certain information with reference to section 32(1) of the Access to Public Administration Files Act. In addition, he stated that, in essence, he could not criticise the Ministry’s decision that, based on a specific assessment, access to certain information could be denied under section 33 paragraph (5) of the Act. The Ombudsman therefore took no further action in the specific case. No statements on cases concluded in 2019 have been published. Ministry of Climate, Energy and Utilities No statements on cases concluded in 2019 have been published. Ministry of Culture The following statement on a case concluded in 2019 has been published: 2019-7. Ministry of Culture entitled to deny access to information in relation to communication with Royal House about Crown Prince’s participation in IOC The Ministry of Culture denied a journalist access to various information in relation to the Ministry’s communication with the Danish Royal House about The Crown Prince’s participation in a meeting of the International Olympic Committee (the IOC) about Russia’s right to participate in the Olympic Games in Rio in 2016. In connection with a previous investigation (Case No. 2018-13) of a complaint about the same case, the Ombudsman stated that in his opinion access to the documents in question could not be denied under section 23(1) paragraph (1) of the Access to Public Administration Files Act on internal documents as The Crown Prince had been acting in a personal capacity and not ‘participating in the governing of the State’. The Ministry and the Royal House were therefore to be regarded as distinct authorities in relation to the Act. In a new decision, the Ministry referred to section 32(1) of the Access to Public Administration Files Act on the realm’s foreign policy interests etc. In addition, the Ministry referred to section 33 paragraph (5) of At the same time, however, the Ombudsman commented in more general terms that in his opinion section 33 paragraph (5) of the Access to Public Administration Files Act does not authorise withholding information in order to protect the Royal House against, for instance, public debate about whether members of the Royal House have acted within the limits to their freedom to act as private individuals (‘in a personal capacity’). Ministry of Environment and Food No statements on cases concluded in 2019 have been published. Ministry of Taxation The following statements on cases concluded in 2019 have been published: 2019-1. No authority for advance tax ruling A housing cooperative paid out DKK 360,000 to its members and subsequently requested an advance ruling from the Danish Customs and Tax Administration (SKAT) on the tax implications for its members. SKAT made an advance ruling that the members would be taxed on the amount paid out to them, and the ruling was subsequently upheld by the National Tax Tribunal.