| In the decision of 12.03.2024, case no. VI ZR 1370/20, the Federal Court of Justice had to deal with the question of whether information obtained through unauthorized video surveillance is subject to the prohibition on the use of evidence(https://juris.bundesgerichtshof.de/cgi-bin/rechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bgh&Art=en&az=VI%20ZR%201370/20&nr=138020). The decision was based on the case that a landlord suspected the tenant of unauthorized subletting. To prove this, he commissioned a private investigator. The latter in turn carried out video surveillance. This actually substantiated the suspicion of unauthorized subletting, and the landlord gave the tenants notice. The BGH ultimately weighed up the tenants’ interests and assessed them based on Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. It concluded that the tenants’ interests prevailed because milder means would have been available. The decision once again demonstrates how important it is to ensure the permissibility of the collection of personal data. |