Surveillance Cameras and Privacy at Work

Book your free initial call

    We endeavour to make an initial response to all enquiries within 24 hours but please be aware that on some occasions due to prior commitments or volume of calls we will not be able to respond in that time frame. We also operate a 48 hour return policy. This return policy means that if we have not responded with 48 hours of your initial enquiry we are unable to do so due to current workloads and we will destroy your data accordingly. This policy ensures you are not left waiting and have the certainty that your data is not compromised. In most instances however we are able to make contact within a 24 hour time frame. Please note our free initial advice service is available to clients at our total discretion and if your case is of a complex nature we may not be able to offer you a free consultation. However in these instances we will advise you what the charge would be for an initial fixed fee consultation.
  • (view our privacy statement)
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

In Antovic and Mirkovic v Montenegro the European Court of Human Rights held that video surveillance of lecture halls violated a professor’s right to privacy.

In this case the Dean of the School of Mathematics at Montenegro University installed video surveillance within a public lecture theatre in order to “protect safety of property, people and students”. The system also recorded any lectures that took place within the theatre. The data recorded by the surveillance system was code protected, could only be accessed by the Dean and was kept for 1 year.

Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects the right to respect for private and family life. The Personal Data Protection Agency ordered for the cameras to be removed as there was no evidence that safety was a problem and so there were no legitimate grounds for needing to record such data. Ms Antovic and Mr Mirkovic brought compensation claims but Domestic courts found that Article 8 had not been violated.

However, the European Court did find that Article 8 had in fact been breached as, even though the University is a public venue, the right to a private life also includes their business and professional activities.