by Parliament in those sections, is impermissible as a matter of law. Section 36(2) (c) cannot be engaged on this basis.” 80. We agree with the submissions of UoE on this point. For the Appellant to be right there would need to have been a specific provision in FOIA outlawing this overlap such as exists in relation to the interplay between other exemptions. However there is no such provision. 81. A further point raised by the Appellant is that he says that only the QPO at the time of the request can be considered. We agree with the IC in its response to this in its submission on 2 October 2023 (para 14) where the IC differentiates between:(a) the timing of the deployment of an exemption which it asserts (subject to the Tribunal’s case management powers) can be for the first time during an appeal (and similarly during the Commissioner’s Investigation); and (b) the timing of the facts and matters that can be relied upon in the QPO (whenever in the process a relevant exception is deployed) which it says must be as at the date the original request is refused as in Montague 82. As regards the issue of when an exemption can be raised we noted the Decision of the Court of Appeal in Birkett-v- Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2011] EWCA Civ 1606 (para 28) where it was held:“Thus, whether the public authority is the appellant or the respondent in an appeal to the Tribunal, the Rules ensure that any new exception, if it is to be relied upon, is identified at the outset of the appeal, and within a relatively short time. Any application by the public authority to rely upon a new exception made after the time limit for its grounds of appeal/response would be subject to the Tribunal's case management powers under rule 5..” Tribunal review-section 41 83. The DN supports the use by UoE of this exemption. (from A15) is that:- A summary of the DN  (para 84) the IC was satisfied that UoE obtained the information from other people and, as UoE has explained, “some of it was augmented through the report’s author’s additional explanation or opinion.”  (para 86) there was the necessary quality of confidence because “The matters that were the subject to review and which generated the report were serious. In addition the withheld information is not otherwise accessible.” 22