Categories: Insights, Practice

Tag: account di posta aziendale, cessazione rapporto di lavoro, disattivazione, Garante


20 Jan 2020

Employers who keeps the former employee’s email account active commits an offence

The Data Protection Authority, with “Measure no. 216 dated 4 December 2019“, confirmed an already consolidated position, according to which employers that keeps an employee’s company email account active after the termination of the employment contract and accesses the emails contained in the mailbox, commits an offence.

The case

A company used the labour court against a former employee because he offered products in direct competition with its own products. The information in support of the action had been collected by the applicant company by logging in to the email address account of the former employee even after the termination of the employment contract.

The worker thus complained to the Data Protection Authority, claiming that his former employer had not deactivated his email account and had accessed the messages he had received.

The company, in challenging the complaint filed by the employee, stated that the failure to deactivate the account and the simultaneous forwarding of emails to the address of the head of the Information Technology department had been arranged because (i) the former employee had failed to send customers a communication with the new company references. Adding, moreover, that (ii) only correspondence containing business messages had been opened and not personal messages and that (iii) the former employee was aware of the “business practice” according to which the employer, after the termination of the contract, would check correspondence addressed to him.

Acknowledging that the facts complained of are prior to the entry into force of EU Regulation 2016/679 and that the information was given to employees verbally, the Data Protection Authority in any case declared the repeated use of the individual company account of a person no longer belonging to that company organisation unlawful.

The Data Protection Authority, in fact, stated that the employer must act in accordance with the principles of lawfulness, necessity and proportionality, which are the foundations of the matter of personal data protection, ordering the removal of corporate email accounts attributable to identified or identifiable persons. At the same time as closing the account, according to the Authority, the employer is obliged, if necessary, to equip itself with automatic systems to inform third parties and provide them with alternative addresses to contact. In addition, the employer must take appropriate measures to prevent incoming messages from being displayed throughout the period when the automatic system is active.

According to the provisions of the Measure, it is the implementation of appropriate technical and organisational measures that makes it possible to balance, on the one hand, the interest of the owner (alias the employer) to access the information necessary for it to continue the management of the work activity and, on the other hand, to ensure respect for the legitimate expectation of the worker to confidentiality on correspondence. In addition, in the opinion of the Data Protection Authority, the adoption of internal rules on the basis of which information on technical and organisational management adopted is shared with employees is one of the correct measures to be implemented.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Contact

Need information? Write to us and our team of experts will respond as soon as possible.

Fill in the form

More news and insights

1 Oct 2026

Corporate e-mail and defensive monitoring: when the GDPR and employment law lead to different outcomes 

The Piaggio case clearly illustrates how the same set of facts can give rise to profoundly different assessments depending on the perspective adopted. In its decision of 13…

1 Oct 2026

NASpI and Reinstatement: the Employee’s Election Causes Loss of the Benefit 

Headnote   In its recent judgment No. 24981 of 3 September 2026, the Italian Supreme Court held that, where a dismissal is set aside with an order of reinstatement…

1 Oct 2026

Did you know that… testimony given in court may have disciplinary relevance and, in the most serious cases, justify dismissal? 

The Italian Supreme Court, Labour Section, by order no. 25687 of 22 September 2026, addressed the issue of the disciplinary relevance of statements made by an employee in…

29 Sep 2026

Shadow AI in the workplace: how to govern risks, data, and security (Agenda digitale, 29 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca and Martina De Angeli)

The spread of artificial intelligence tools used without corporate authorization exposes businesses to risks involving personal data, confidential information, know-how, and cybersecurity. To govern Shadow AI, organizations need…

24 Sep 2026

The concept of “territorial scope” in a non-compete agreement (Top24 Lavoro Ai – Il Sole 24 Ore, 24 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca and Alessandro Ferrari)

Interpretative issues in light of the most recent case law on the nullity of non-compete agreements due to the indeterminacy of territorial scope By an order issued on…

16 Sep 2026

Did you know that… repeated violations of company procedures may justify the dismissal of a store manager?

The Italian Supreme Court (Labour Section), in Order No. 25231 of 11 September 2026, upheld the lawfulness of the dismissal for just cause of a store manager who…