Type: Judgment

Authority: European Authorities: European Court of human rights

Date: 04/03/2007

Subject: Relying on Article 8 (right to respect for private life and correspondence) and 13 (right to an effective remedy), Ms Copland complained that, during her employment at the College, her telephone, e-mail and internet usage had been monitored at the Deputy Principal’s instigation. The Court considered that the collection and storage of personal information relating to Ms Copland through her use of the telephone, e-mail and internet interfered with her right to respect for her private life and correspondence, and that that interference was not “in accordance with the law”, there having been no domestic law at the relevant time to regulate monitoring. While the Court accepted that it might sometimes have been legitimate for an employer to monitor and control an employee’s use of telephone and internet, in the present case it was not required to determine whether that interference was “necessary in a democratic society”. The Court therefore held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 8 and that it was not necessary to examine the case under

Parties: Copland c/ Regno Unito

Classification: Freedoms - Art. 7 Privacy - Justice - Art. 47 Right to an effective remedy before a tribunal