Fired immediately

Fired immediately

Our colleague Wendy Rijcken-van Eck won a procedure for Methorst this summer that has also been discussed in various trade journals and has even been covered by RTL Nieuws.

This is an interesting court decision, especially for company investigators and employers. The reason for this is that there is little case law on whether a detective agency is allowed to secretly film a sick employee. It’s about violation of employee privacy versus the interests of an employer. Wendy was able to successfully argue in this case that the employer’s interest now took precedence and that the aiming of a hidden camera at the employee’s home was justified.

Having a sick employee filmed by a detective agency? The judge allowed it to our client: a much-discussed ruling among lawyers, employers and detectives.’

The employee in question had repeatedly stated that he could not work or drive a car due to knee problems, but it turned out that he had been doing odd jobs in his new home for two months. A tip from a colleague led to the suspicion that this employee was lying to his employer and company doctor. The instant dismissal of this lying employee was declared valid by the court without imposing a fine for privacy violation.

Cases like this are of course very casuistic and it is certainly not a license for employers to just use detectives to track employees, but there is room. We advise employers to always make a careful weighing of interests here and preferably to obtain prior advice from a legal counsel. This case provides a valuable addition to the case law on employee privacy, and we are naturally proud of that.

specialismen voor dit project