prior to the monitoring of his communications that such monitoring was to take place
as well as the extent and nature of the same, including the fact that the employer
could access the content of such communications. Further, the Grand Chamber
recognized that, although the contracting states to the ECHR have a significant
margin of appreciation in establishing a legal framework governing an employer’s
regulation of private communications in the workplace, they must ensure that
adequate and sufficient safeguards against abuse are in place. It also recognized
that national courts had failed to guarantee appropriate remedies.
If the solution of the Grand Chamber does not surprise us, it is clear that the Court
draws here the outlines of a very protective status of the employee with respect to his
privacy in the context of a company.
23 The Court has thus just noted the positive
obligations of the State to ensure to persons the guarantee of the enjoyment of a right
enshrined in the Convention (Article 8).
4 Data Retention in Romania
A new law (no. 235/2015) amending the legislation governing the processing of
personal data and privacy in the electronic communications sector was published in
the Official Gazette on 14 October 2015 and has entered into force.
4.1 Purpose of the New Retention Law
The New Retention Law has been enacted to implement a Romanian Constitutional
Court decision from 2014 which declared unconstitutional the local legislation
transposing Directive 2006/24/EC
24 that ruled out the fact that the previous legislation could give rise to abuses in accessing and using retained data. The Court of
Justice of the European Union invalidated this Directive in 2014, on the grounds that
its provisions infringe fundamental rights concerning the respect for privacy and the
protection of personal data, being considered in breach of privacy according to
CJEU Joined Cases C-293/12 and C-594/12 decision from 8 July 2014. The
European Court of Justice (CJEU) annulled the data retention directive, but this
did not make national data retention legislations (whether or not enacted as implementation of the annulled directive) automatically invalid.
25
23 See Lazar (2018).
24 Directive 2006/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the
retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available
electronic communications services or of public communications networks and amending Directive
2002/58/EC.
25 https://observatory.mappingtheinternet.eu/page/data-retention-legislation-europe.
302
E. Lazar and D. N. Costescu
as well as the extent and nature of the same, including the fact that the employer
could access the content of such communications. Further, the Grand Chamber
recognized that, although the contracting states to the ECHR have a significant
margin of appreciation in establishing a legal framework governing an employer’s
regulation of private communications in the workplace, they must ensure that
adequate and sufficient safeguards against abuse are in place. It also recognized
that national courts had failed to guarantee appropriate remedies.
If the solution of the Grand Chamber does not surprise us, it is clear that the Court
draws here the outlines of a very protective status of the employee with respect to his
privacy in the context of a company.
23 The Court has thus just noted the positive
obligations of the State to ensure to persons the guarantee of the enjoyment of a right
enshrined in the Convention (Article 8).
4 Data Retention in Romania
A new law (no. 235/2015) amending the legislation governing the processing of
personal data and privacy in the electronic communications sector was published in
the Official Gazette on 14 October 2015 and has entered into force.
4.1 Purpose of the New Retention Law
The New Retention Law has been enacted to implement a Romanian Constitutional
Court decision from 2014 which declared unconstitutional the local legislation
transposing Directive 2006/24/EC
24 that ruled out the fact that the previous legislation could give rise to abuses in accessing and using retained data. The Court of
Justice of the European Union invalidated this Directive in 2014, on the grounds that
its provisions infringe fundamental rights concerning the respect for privacy and the
protection of personal data, being considered in breach of privacy according to
CJEU Joined Cases C-293/12 and C-594/12 decision from 8 July 2014. The
European Court of Justice (CJEU) annulled the data retention directive, but this
did not make national data retention legislations (whether or not enacted as implementation of the annulled directive) automatically invalid.
25
23 See Lazar (2018).
24 Directive 2006/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the
retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available
electronic communications services or of public communications networks and amending Directive
2002/58/EC.
25 https://observatory.mappingtheinternet.eu/page/data-retention-legislation-europe.
302
E. Lazar and D. N. Costescu