The Bermuda Business Development Agency failed to complete a review of its decision to refuse to release documents about an overseas company that wanted to set up shop on the island inside the legislated time limit. But Gitanjali Gutierrez, the Information Commissioner, said that the BDA completed its decision during a review of the delay, so no further action was required.The BDA received a Public Access to Information request for records related to Game Theory Ltd, a Guernsey-based private company that said it was an “investment house that places bets on investing in sports businesses”, in May.The company had sought help to set up an office in Bermuda, but decided not to after a story ran in The Royal Gazette’s business section about a job advertisement it had placed to recruit six local employees as “sports trading operators”.The decision led David Burt, the Premier, to claim in a February speech in Parliament that The Royal Gazette and the One Bermuda Alliance were to blame for the company’s decision not to proceed. He alleged the newspaper had joined forces with the Opposition to derail success in Bermuda’s fledgeling fintech industry.The BDA released an initial decision on the Pati request on July 25, but the applicant requested an internal review on July 31.Just two days before the September 11 deadline for a decision, the BDA requested a one-month extension, but on October 8 the applicant requested an independent review by the ICO.The BDA told the ICO that the reason for the delay was that it had contacted third parties, but did not get replies in time.The agency argued in the interest of fairness, the BDA was required to consider whether any concerned third party should be notified of the internal review and given an opportunity to make representations.But the ICO found the delay in response did not change the timeline to complete the internal review.Ms Gutierrez said: “The BDA was correct to point out that it may be in the interest of fairness for a public authority to notify a third party and invite their submissions at the internal review stage, even though the Pati Act does not require public authorities to do so. “When it chooses to notify a third party at that stage, however, the public authority is still required to issue an internal review decision within the six week time frame set out in the Pati Act.”Ms Gutierrez added that if the BDA had not got submissions from the third party in time, it should have continued to process the request and make a decision based on the information available.She added: “If the internal review decision was to withhold the third party’s personal information and the requester is not satisfied, they have the right to apply for an independent review by the Information Commissioner.”