header-logo header-logo

Employers can read private messages

19 January 2016
Issue: 7683 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Lawyers have offered reassurance in the wake of a Strasbourg ruling on private messages sent at work.

The European Court of Human Rights ruled, in Barbulescu v Romania (App. 61496/08), that employers can read personal messages sent by employees at work, whether on email, WhatsApp, Facebook or other services. Mihai Barbulescu, a Romanian engineer, was dismissed for making private use of his employer’s Yahoo Messenger account during work hours and in breach of company rules. He had been notified that his communications could be monitored. The court rejected argument that his Art 8 rights had been breached, finding that a fair balance had been reached between his right to respect for his private life and correspondence and his employer’s interests.

Makbool Javaid, head of employment law at Simons Muirhead and Burton, says: “Some reports in the media that this judgment gives the green light for an employer’s ‘snooper’s charter’ are wide of the mark.

“This case is fact specific and the bottom line is that Art 8 did apply, but it was proved that in the circumstances the right could be restricted.”

Nick Hawkins, solicitor at Stewarts Law, says: “The decision has caused something of a stir, with it being suggested in some areas that this has given employers carte blanche to rummage through employees private communications. It has not.

“It is not new that employers are able to access their employees’ private storage devices to retrieve their confidential material, in an effort to protect their business interests.”

Kathryn Dooks, employment partner at Kemp Little, says the decision is“actually broadly in line with existing English employment tribunals decisions in this area”.

Sarah Rushton, employment partner at Moon Beever, says: “There is a common misconception that employees have an absolute right to privacy at work.

“However, employers can legitimately review private emails sent over their workplace systems if appropriate safeguards are put in place. An employer may have a genuine concern that its systems are being abused, either by excessive use for private purposes or for nefarious reasons. The moral of the story is for employers to have appropriate policies in place for dealing with this.”

Issue: 7683 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Serious injury teambolstered by high-profile partner hire

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Firm strengthens employment team with partner hire

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

Lawyers’ liability practice strengthened with partner appointment in London

NEWS
Ceri Morgan, knowledge counsel at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP, analyses the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd, which reshapes the law of fiduciary relationships and common law bribery
The boundaries of media access in family law are scrutinised by Nicholas Dobson in NLJ this week
Reflecting on personal experience, Professor Graham Zellick KC, Senior Master of the Bench and former Reader of the Middle Temple, questions the unchecked power of parliamentary privilege
Geoff Dover, managing director at Heirloom Fair Legal, sets out a blueprint for ethical litigation funding in the wake of high-profile law firm collapses
James Grice, head of innovation and AI at Lawfront, explores how artificial intelligence is transforming the legal sector
back-to-top-scroll