A ruling by the European Court of Human Rights means many businesses will need rethink their approach to the monitoring of private messages sent by employees during the working day.
Mr Barbulescu, a Romanian national set up a work-related Yahoo Messenger account at his employer’s request. After monitoring activity on the account, his employer found personal messages from Mr Barbulescu to third parties, including his fiancé. When confronted about this he initially denied personal use of the account. He was subsequently shown a transcript of many of the messages, and was dismissed. However, the transcripts included messages he had sent from his personal Yahoo Messenger account and included information about his health and sex life.
In a surprise decision the ECHR concluded that the employer breached Mr Barbulescu’s right to privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights. There is no right of appeal from this decision.
Online and instant messaging has become a ubiquitous feature of the modern workplace. Whilst employees are encouraged to use social media for work purposes, employers struggle to encourage legitimate and proportionate usage, whilst also controlling private or excessive messaging.
The employer in this case had policies clearly stating that personal internet use was strictly forbidden and which warned of the possibility of surveillance. Nevertheless, the court still found the monitoring to have breached the employee’s privacy.
An employer who doesn’t take this decision seriously will not only risk legal action by an employee, they may also find themselves in hot water with the Information Commissioner for unlawful processing of personal data, particularly when sensitive personal data is iinvolved. Employers should review as a matter of urgency their policies and practices surrounding the monitoring of workers electronic communications.
The contents of this article are intended for general information purposes only and shall not be deemed to be, or constitute legal advice. We cannot accept responsibility for any loss as a result of acts or omissions taken in respect of this article.
Related insights
Do I need a solicitor if the assets in our marital pot are straightforward?
When separating from a spouse or civil partner, it can be tempting to assume that legal advice is unnecessary if there are only modest assets involved. Many people believe that…
Read moreDebenhams Ottaway recognised as one of the 2026 eprivateclient Top Law Firms
Debenhams Ottaway’s private client team has been recognised as one of the 2026 eprivateclient Top Law Firms, marking the sixth consecutive year the team has received the accolade. Published annually,…
Read moreInheritance disputes: 4 top tips if you are considering making an Inheritance claim
The loss of a loved one is never easy. Learning that you have not been adequately provided for under their estate can add further distress, particularly where this results in…
Read moreTrusted expertise and client insight drive improved Chambers UK 2027 rankings
Debenhams Ottaway has achieved another strong set of results in Chambers UK 2027. The results follow our recent Legal 500 2027 success, where every ranking was maintained, and the Chambers…
Read moreLiquidators’ challenge to Co‑op restructuring fails: Key lessons on undervalue and preference claims
Liquidators challenged a 2015 restructuring that stripped assets out of Food Retailer Operations Limited (FRO) before its insolvency, arguing undervalue and preference. The court had to determine the nature of…
Read more