Categories: Insights, Case Law


29 May 2017

Installation of video cameras requires the union authorization or an administrative permit

The Court of Cassation, criminal division, with judgement No. 22148/2017, ruled once again on the possibility for the employer to install video cameras without implementing the union directive as per art. 4 of Law No. 300/70. In the case in hand, the Sole Director of a company decided to install at a local subsidiary a video surveillance system that consisted of two video cameras connected through the Wi-Fi and ADSL network to a monitor with which it was possible to monitor the work of employees. The Sole Director did not enter into a specific union agreement for it (nor he requested an administrative permit) but informed the employees about it and they authorized the monitoring performed by the employer. After the proceedings filed against the Sole Director, the latter was sentenced to pay a fine of 600 euro pursuant to article 38 of the Workers’ Charter. In particular, the Court of Cassation identified as unlawful the behaviour of the employer due to the fact that art. 4 of the Workers’ Charter has the goal of protecting a collective asset and not an individual one. For this reason, an employee, not having contractual authority equal to that of the employer, cannot authorize the latter to perform specific actions without prior authorization of the union representatives where expressly established by the law. Therefore, the Court of Cassation confirmed once again that the need to install equipment – whenever such equipment is installed to perform remote monitoring of the work activity – be preceded by an agreement between the employer and union representatives of the workers or, lacking an agreement, by a permit issued by an administrative authority. Otherwise the installation in question is unlawful and will give rise to criminal sanctions.

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

12 Oct 2026

“AI tools, remote work and confidential data: employer liability in a borderless environment” – IBA Conference 2026

At the IBA Annual Conference 2026 in Copenhagen, our Managing Partner Vittorio De Luca moderated a panel on one of the most pressing challenges facing employers today: the…

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…