{"id":25596,"date":"2025-05-02T09:57:54","date_gmt":"2025-05-02T07:57:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.delucapartners.it\/news\/sistemi-di-videosorveglianza-installati-in-spazi-esterni-il-tar-annulla-il-provvedimento-di-diniego-dellitl-2\/"},"modified":"2026-03-31T18:02:06","modified_gmt":"2026-03-31T16:02:06","slug":"sistemi-di-videosorveglianza-installati-in-spazi-esterni-il-tar-annulla-il-provvedimento-di-diniego-dellitl","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.delucapartners.it\/en\/insights\/normativasurveillance-systems-installed-in-outdoor-areas-italian-administrative-court-overturns-the-labor-inspectorate-denial\/","title":{"rendered":"Surveillance systems installed in outdoor areas: Italian Administrative Court overturns the labor inspectorate denial"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The Regional Administrative Court (i.e. \u201cTribunale Amministrativo Regionale,\u201d <\/em>or \u201cTAR<\/em>\u201d) of Tuscany recently annulled the denial issued by the local labor inspectorate (i.e. \u201cIspettorato Territoriale del Lavoro<\/em>\u201d or \u201cITL<\/em>\u201d) concerning a company\u2019s request to install additional surveillance cameras at the perimeter of its industrial site. The Court clarified that even outdoor areas where work activities occur only occasionally or intermittently still qualify as \u201cworkplaces\u201d under Italian law.\u200b<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The case<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The case originated from a request submitted by a company to the competent ITL \u2014 as provided by Article 4 of the Italian Worker Statute (Law 300\/70) \u2014 whereby the company approached the Public Administration after failing to reach an agreement with the corporate trade union representatives. Specifically, the company\u2019s request outlined that, despite the presence of an existing surveillance system installed along the perimeter of the corporate premises, there was still a need to install an additional nine cameras. These cameras were to be placed in a peripheral area of the industrial facility to monitor the proper disposal of waste in designated unloading areas \u2014 areas that were also used by external parties \u2014 in order to prevent risks to worker safety, fire hazards, environmental damage, and to protect the company\u2019s assets.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The ITL\u2019s denial was based on its classification of the areas as \u201cworkplaces\u201d and the perceived disproportion of the measure, which was deemed inappropriate in relation to the risks involved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The Regional Administrative Court\u2019s decision<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The Court found the company\u2019s appeal to be valid for the following reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n