CCTV used to require installation by specialist security engineers, but modern small-scale camera systems can now be rigged up by almost anyone. Pam Loch, managing partner of Loch Employment Law, looks at the legal implications of surveillance cameras in the workplace.
Cases on appeal provides news on key case law developments that are expected.
So far in 2016, there have been notable employment law cases on: holiday pay; childcare vouchers; social media at work; fraudulent sick leave; and reasonable adjustments for disabled people.
In Garamukanwa v Solent NHS Trust  IRLR 476 EAT, the EAT held that an employee who was dismissed for sending anonymous malicious emails to his former girlfriend could not rely on art.8 of the European Convention on Human Rights to prevent his employer from using evidence from his iPhone connecting him with the fake email addresses from which the messages were sent. Since the iPhone evidence had been supplied by the police following their investigations and with permission for it to be used, the tribunal had not erred in finding that the employer acted within the range of reasonable responses.
Updated to include information on Garamukanwa v Solent NHS Trust, in which the EAT considered whether or not an employee had a right to privacy in respect of emails and photographs on his iPhone relating to a work colleague.
Do employees give up all rights to privacy when they enter the workplace? XpertHR editors Laura Merrylees and Fiona Cuming discuss two topical cases, their implications and the practical steps employers can take to protect their business interests.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that the employee had no reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of inappropriate emails and photographs on his iPhone relating to a work colleague that affected the workplace.
The High Court has upheld a challenge by way of judicial review to the present criminal record checks scheme, finding that the relevant statutory provisions are incompatible with the European Convention of Human Rights. Ryan Stringer sets out the implications of the decision for employers.
In Barbulescu v Romania  IRLR 235 ECHR, the European Court of Human Rights held that an employer did not breach its employee's human rights when it monitored his private use of a business messaging account.
In this Romanian case, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) accepted that the employee's right to a private life had been affected when his employer accessed his Yahoo messages. However, the ECHR went on to hold that the employer's actions were justified in the circumstances and not in breach of art. 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to art.8 of the Convention on Human Rights (the right to respect for private and family life).