140 ANNUAL REPORT 2014 Minister’s Office should have informed the journalist about the reason why the Office had not searched in documents right up till the time the decision was made. P. MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT The following statements on cases concluded in 2014 have been published: 2014-21. DENIED ACCESS TO INFORMATION ABOUT WORKPLACE EVALUATIONS. INTERNAL DOCUMENTS. EXTRACTION DUTY A journalist asked the Ministry of Transport for access to information about the Ministry’s two most recent workplace evaluations. The Ministry denied the request on the grounds that these were internal documents. In addition to that, the Ministry did not think that the workplace evaluations contained information that was subject to extraction. The Ombudsman could not criticise that the Ministry of Transport had regarded the workplace evaluations as internal work documents that could be exempted from access. In that context, the Ombudsman emphasised, among other things, that a possible handing over of the documents to a third party had taken place for legal reasons. However, the Ombudsman found that the workplace evaluations contained lots of information encompassed by the extraction duty. On this basis, the Ombudsman recommended that the Ministry reopen the case and make a new decision in this matter. 2014-27. INFORMATION ON RESTRUCTURING OF THE DANISH COASTAL AUTHORITY WAS ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION A journalist complained to the Ombudsman because the Ministry of Transport had refused his request for access to documents regarding the transfer of the Danish Coastal Authority from the Ministry of Transport to the Ministry of the Environment with reference to the so-called ministerial advice and assistance rule. The Ombudsman stated that it was of decisive importance to the assessment of the case whether the information on the transfer of the Danish Coastal Authority was environmental in character, because if so, the case would have