Video cameras and disciplinary breaches (MAG de Legalcommunity, 10 May 2023 – Enrico De Luca, Martina De Angeli)

By Order No 8375 of 23 March 2023, the Italian Court of Cassation confirmed that footage from video surveillance systems installed for security purposes may be used to prove an employee’s disciplinary breach.

The facts of the case and the first and second instance proceedings

The case arose from a disciplinary sanction of suspension from duty and pay for ten days imposed on a vocational teacher for forcibly grabbing a student by the shirt and, after releasing his grip, causing him to fall to the ground.

The teacher, moreover, ‘while the pupil […] communicated to his mother what had happened […]’ addressed the latter ‘in an ill-mannered way using decidedly heated tones’.

The event was filmed by means of the video surveillance system installed by the Authority – the educator’s employer – at the Authority’s premises, and the recordings used to make the disciplinary complaint.

The teacher, having received the disciplinary measure, in requesting its annulment challenged, among other things, the use of the video surveillance system footage for disciplinary purposes.

In the proceedings on the merits, the Court of Appeal rejected the request to annul the sanction and, upholding the appeal lodged by the teacher, reformed the first instance judgment by redetermining the sanction as a fine of three hours.

The teacher appealed before the Italian Court of Cassation and the Authority filed a counter-appeal.

The decision of the Italian Supreme Court

The Italian Court of Cassation – in confirming the ruling on the merits – affirmed the lawfulness of the use of video surveillance system footage for the purpose of making a complaint based on an employee’s disciplinary breach.

Noting the lack of defects in (i) the explanation of the factual and legal reasons on which the decision on the merits was based or (ii) the explanation of the logical / legal path followed by the Court of Appeal, the Court of Cassation confirmed the correctness of the assessment by the second instance judges in assessing the video surveillance system footage on the basis of the ‘argument for the usability [of the footage], in conjunction with the other investigative elements considered’.

The full version can be accessed at MAG de Legalcommunity