1. A copy of the “independent report” referred to by the Council in its response of 27 May 2025, which stated:
“Odd one this as we’ve been trying to find the root cause of the defect and we’re of the view (following an independent report) that its most likely an issue with the installation process – so we’re in discussions with that particular contractor to make sure the girls go back up in the right way and at no further cost to the Council.”
Please see attached Report 1758 Failure Analysis Threaded Bar R2.pdf
Personal data - This information is withheld under Section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Information is exempt from disclosure if it is the personal data of an individual other than the requester and where the disclosure of that personal data would be in breach of any of the data protection principles.
2. 2. Details of the defect identified, including any findings concerning:
- the structural integrity of the statuettes,
- their supporting cupolas,
- the fixing method,
- wind loading, and
- any other engineering or health and safety concerns.
This information is contained within the attached - Report 1758_Failure_Analysis_Threaded_Bar_R2.pdf
Personal data - This information is withheld under Section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Information is exempt from disclosure if it is the personal data of an individual other than the requester and where the disclosure of that personal data would be in breach of any of the data protection principles.
3. 3. The name of the contractor or contractors involved in:
- manufacturing,
- installing,
- removing,
- inspecting, and/or
- repairing the statuettes and their mountings since 2017.
RH Conservation Ltd, Bryn Thomas Cranes Ltd, Warren Access, North Tyneside Council (NTC) In-House, BDN Engineers, DJ Installations, Saracen Opal.
4. 4. Copies of any correspondence between North Tyneside Council and the relevant contractor(s) concerning responsibility for the defect, remedial works, warranty issues, or cost recovery.
All matters are through North Tyneside Council (NTC) insurers.
5. 5. Copies of any legal advice, correspondence, or internal communications that explain the “legal process” referred to by a ward councillor on 27 April 2026.
- If legal professional privilege is claimed, please provide a description of the nature of the legal issue, the parties involved, and the dates of the relevant correspondence.
Correspondence between the Authority and our legal advisors is subject to Legal Professional Privilege - Legal Advice Privilege and is not subject to disclosure.
This information is exempt from disclosure under section 42 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (information covered by legal professional privilege).
For the avoidance of doubt, the Authority is not prepared to waive privilege. Section 42 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) states:
(1) Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege… could be maintained in legal proceedings is exempt information.
(2) The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent that, compliance with section 1(1)(a) would involve the disclosure of any information (whether or not already recorded) in respect of which such a claim could be maintained in legal proceedings.
Legal professional privilege (LPP) is not defined in the Act or in any other legislation. It is a common law concept shaped by the courts over time. It is designed to provide confidentiality between legal advisers and their clients to ensure openness between them and safeguard access to fully informed, realistic and frank legal advice. This in turn ensures that justice is fairly administered. Legal professional privilege belongs to the client, and material cannot be revealed without the consent of the client, not even to a court.
A professional legal adviser for the purposes of LPP could be a solicitor, barrister, licensed conveyancer or legal executive holding professional qualifications recognised by the Institute of Legal Executives (ILEX). It makes no difference whether the legal adviser is an external lawyer or a professional in-house lawyer.
In this case, the LPP is legal advice privilege. Legal advice privilege covers confidential communications between the client and a lawyer made for the dominant purpose of seeking or giving legal advice. In the current instance, the information that you have requested constitutes confidential legal advice given by our professional legal advisers. We are, therefore, satisfied that the exemption applies.
The exemption is, however, subject to the public interest test. The Authority has considered whether the public interest is maintaining this exemption is outweighed by the public interest in disclosure.
This Council has considered the following reasons in favour of disclosure: The assumption in favour of disclosure and the rationale behind the assumption, i.e. accountability, transparency, furthering public debate etc. Balanced against this are the following reasons against disclosure: The concept of legal professional privilege and the rationale behind the concept which is to ensure frankness between lawyer and client which goes to serve the wider administration of justice.
On balance the, Authority considers that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure.
6. The current status of the project to reinstate the statuettes.
Undetermined - The reinstatement of the statues does not currently form part of the Council's Investment Plan; therefore, there is no confirmed timetable for the project at present.
7. 7. The anticipated timetable for:
- completion of any legal process,
- any remedial works, and
- reinstatement of the statuettes.
Undetermined - The reinstatement of the statues does not currently form part of the Council's Investment Plan; therefore, there is no confirmed timetable for the project at present.
8. 8. The total amount spent to date on:
- removal,
- investigation,
- replacement replicas,
- further removals,
- professional reports, and
- legal costs.
The total expenditure covering the elements above is:
£150098.75
(This amount is detailed within the attached cost spreadsheet).
9. 9. Copies of any council reports, briefing notes, or committee papers relating to this matter.
No information held. There have been no Cabinet or Committee reports in relation to this matter.
10. Copies of any correspondence between the Council and:
- the Mayor,
- elected councillors, and
- Spanish City management
concerning the delay in reinstatement since January 2024.
No information held.