- The ECtHR confirmed that employer access to a Yahoo Messenger account used for work purposes can be compatible with Article 8 ECHR.
- Courts emphasized that the access was legitimate because the employer assumed that the messages were related to professional activities.
- The monitoring was judged to be proportionate and limited; the employee was unable to convincingly demonstrate his private use.
The ECtHR has ruled with Judgment from 2.1.2016 declared an employer’s access to its employee’s Yahoo Messenger account intended for professional purposes to be compatible with ECHR 8 in the specific case:
54. Therefore, the Court has to examine whether the State, in the context of its positive obligations under Article 8, struck a fair balance between the applicant’s right to respect for his private life and correspondence and his employer’s interests.
[…]57 […] the Court notes that both the County Court and the Court of Appeal attached particular importance to the fact that the employer had accessed the applicant’s Yahoo Messenger account in the belief that it had contained professional messagessince the latter had initially claimed that he had used it in order to advise clients (see paragraphs 10 and 12 above). It follows that the employer acted within its disciplinary powers since, as the domestic courts found, it had accessed the Yahoo Messenger account on the assumption that the information in question had been related to professional activities and that such access had therefore been legitimate. The Court sees no reason to question these findings.
[…]59 […] the Court finds that it is not unreasonable for an employer to want to verify that the employees are completing their professional tasks during working hours.
60. in addition, the Court notes that it appears that the communications on his Yahoo Messenger account were examined, but not the other data and documents that were stored on his computer. It therefore finds that the employer’s monitoring was limited in scope and proportionate […].
61 Furthermore, the Court finds that the applicant has not convincingly explained why he had used the Yahoo messenger account for personal purposes (see paragraph 30 above).
62) Having regard to the foregoing, the Court concludes in the present case that there is nothing to indicate that the domestic authorities failed to strike a fair balance, within their margin of appreciation, between the applicant’s right to respect for his private life under Article 8 and his employer’s interests.