Unlike a private investigative agency is the entity legally responsible for performing investigations of one or more employees, to assert or defend in court a right, under the terms laid out by the Privacy Authority.

The formalities required in the processing of personal data as expressed authorization n. 6/2016 of 15 December 2016 by the Privacy are profoundly different between the investigator and a private entity be it physical or legal.

The advantage of relying on a private investigator 
‘s investigative agencies are indeed relieved of a number of obligations that otherwise would make no producible and therefore ineffective the evidence acquired with tapings. An example? With judgment no. 10636 of 2 May 2017, the Supreme Court has ruled that it is lawful dismissal for just cause notice to an employee on the basis of video recordings “occult” made in the company’s premises during working hours.

The case concerns the story of a former employee of a supermarket, fired for cause after being caught – through the cameras – to take stock of the confectionery products department.

The cameras had been installed by a detective agency, for the sole purpose of monitoring one single shelf on which were placed certain non entrusted to employees of the supermarket but only to specified external agencies staff and already the subject – previously – of misconduct .

But what if a company “make itself” install unauthorized control devices and detects an illegal?

We asked the lawyer labor law Francesco Antonio La Badessa:

“In this case, even if the devices were not allowed, but still certify a serious criminal offense, no one forbids the company to convey the collected evidence to the public prosecutor for investigation, though on this case not connected with the field strength labor law. “

Continue the lawyer: “Take for example insider trading (buying and selling crime of financial assets by individuals who have had access to confidential information, ed): in this case the offense can be both labor law of nature is nature criminal. The use of unauthorized devices to record places the commission of crimes does not allow the gathering of evidence to be used in civil or labor law process. But if the offense causes harm to third parties and assumes connotations such as to come within the scope of criminal law standards, the same evidence in the civil trial unusable (and labor law) will, on the contrary, be validly provided and offered to demonstrate to the ‘criminal cases in the criminal trial. So the videocontrollo activity unlawfully (ie without the permissions referred to in Article. 4 of the Statute of Workers) from the private with the aim of obtaining evidence for (for example) dismiss the employee, is unusable as evidence in the process, but employment law once acquired by the investigating authorities, it can be validly used by the latter to proceed legally against the individuals responsible for criminal offense. In other words, with the same test, if on one hand it can not be fired, the other one could be convicted in criminal proceedings. ” once acquired by the investigating authorities, it can be validly used by the latter to proceed legally against the individuals responsible for criminal offense. In other words, with the same test, if on one hand it can not be fired, the other one could be convicted in criminal proceedings. ” once acquired by the investigating authorities, it can be validly used by the latter to proceed legally against the individuals responsible for criminal offense. In other words, with the same test, if on one hand it can not be fired, the other one could be convicted in criminal proceedings. “

Ultimately, the control can never be done in ways incompatible with the dignity and well being of the worker and certainly can not be conducted with obsessive or constrictive mode. If the camera is exclusively installed to check the fulfillment of job duties by the employee, this creates an injury: “No one likes to work under pressure with the eye of Big Brother in the head. On the other hand, pursuant to Article 2087 Civil Code, the employer is obliged to take all necessary measures for the protection and physical integrity as well as moral (and therefore the worker’s mental and physical sphere). “

Ultimately, without prejudice to compliance with the limits outlined above (Art. 4 of the Statute of Workers), relying on the support of a detective agency it can still be useful to collect evidence validly usable in all locations of judgment.