Categories: Insights, Practice


27 Sep 2016

The Privacy Authority’s ban on indiscriminate monitoring over the use of the Internet and e-mail by employees

The Privacy Authority, with provision No. 303 dated 13 July 2016 disseminated with the Newsletter No. 419 dated 15 September declared unlawful the processing of data carried out by a university using special software. Specifically, the Privacy Authority noted that the software in question was such as to allow a systematic monitoring of the activity and the use of Internet services individually performed by identifiable individuals; after assessing that the same could not constitute a "work tool", it declared it against the provisions of article 4 of the Workers’ Statute, also in its new wording, lacking in addition a specific authorization by the ministerial bodies. From a different standpoint, the Privacy Authority noted the violation of the principles of lawfulness, relevancy and non-excessive data processing carried out by the university, in addition to the violation of the principle of fairness. This is because the university regulations on the use of the Internet and e-mail was not suitable to provide adequate information to the data subjects pursuant to art. 13 of the Privacy Code. Basically, with this provision, the Privacy Authority reiterated that indiscriminate monitoring on the use of the Internet and e-mail against employees is in conflict with the Privacy Code and with the "new" article 4 of the Workers’ Statute.

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…