This follows the recent decision in Bărbulescu v Romania relating to the monitoring of an employee's email account. But what did the European Court of Human Rights conclude?
Two professors at the University of Montenegro complained that the installation of CCTV cameras in the university auditoriums breached their Article 8 right to respect for private and family life.
The university argued that the CCTV installation was necessary for the protection of the property and people, and to monitor the quality of teaching. The university also noted that the cameras did not record audio, it informed staff of their installation, and it was advised to install them by the police.
The domestic court agreed with the university that the installation was not a breach of the right to privacy as the cameras only captured public teaching areas.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) overturned the decision of the domestic court and found that the professors' right to privacy had been breached in the circumstances.
On the facts, the ECtHR noted that the relevant national legislation provided that video surveillance equipment can be installed in official or business premises, but only if the aims provided for by that section (ie safety of people and property and the protection of confidential data) could not be achieved in any other way. One of the university's stated objectives was to monitor the quality of teaching, which was not a permitted reason under the legislation.
The ECtHR reiterated, as underlined in the case of Bărbulescu v Romania that 'private life' must be interpreted broadly, to include the right to lead a 'private social life' which may also include professional activities taking place in a public context. The decision noted that the professors not only taught students in the auditoriums, but also interacted with them, by "developing mutual relationships and constructing their social identities".
Case law clearly indicates that the concept of 'private life' is broad and includes professional life. Accordingly, workplace surveillance (whether covert or otherwise) is a significant intrusion into employees' private lives.
The lawfulness or otherwise of that intrusion in this case depended significantly on Montenegrin domestic law and the specific aims seeking to be achieved by the surveillance. In the UK, the surveillance of employees is heavily regulated by existing legislation including the Data Protection Act 1998 and guidance such as the Information Commissioner's Employment Practices Code and Information Commissioner's CCTV Code. Taking this into account employers should: