header-logo header-logo

02 February 2018 / Peter Coe
Issue: 7779 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

A right to private life at work?

nlj_7779_coe

Peter Coe looks at Bãrbulescu v Romania in terms of monitoring versus privacy rights & the fast-approaching GDPR

  • Employees have an irreducible minimum right to private social life while at work.
  • Highlights five steps to help employers find the right balance.

Ivery much doubt that when Mr Bogdan Bãrbulescu created a Yahoo instant messenger (IM) account at his employer’s request to deal with customer enquiries he had any idea it would end up the subject of litigation working its way all the way up to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). But it has and, in doing so, it has given us an important ruling relating to employees’ privacy in the workplace, particularly in light of the forthcoming introduction of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in May 2018. The case in question is Bãrbulescu v Romania [2016] App no 61496/08.

What’s it all about?

On 3 July 2007, Bãrbulescu’s employer sent a notice to all employees prohibiting personal use of the internet while at work. The notice also told employees that their work would be monitored.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll