US EditionSupreme Court Bans Intrusive Peephole Cameras
10 Articles
10 Articles
Supreme Court bans intrusive peephole cameras
The Spanish Supreme Court has ruled that installing an electronic peephole equipped with a camera in the door of a private residence can constitute a disproportionate intrusion into the privacy of neighbours when there is no legitimate security reason to justify its use. The case originated in Madrid, where a couple fitted a smart peephole on their apartment door. The device… Source
The Supreme Court (TS) has held that the installation of a recording camera on the peephole of a dwelling can be a "relevant impact on the personal and family privacy" of neighbours if there are no "security problems" in the community and is only used for knowing if someone is going to deliver "some package."In a judgment, the Civil Chamber has dismissed the cassation appeal filed by a couple who were forced to withdraw the electronic peephole o…
A sentence knocks down the installation of an electronic peephole when there are no "security problems" and is used only for the convenience of receiving "some package" The Supreme Court (TS) considers that the installation of a recording camera on the peephole of a home can be a "relevant affectation of the personal and family privacy" of neighbors if there are no "security problems" in the community and is only used for knowing if someone is g…
The Supreme Court has refused that some residents of the Madrid neighborhood of Aluche can install a camcorder in their peephole to see if they get a package when they are not at home because it affects the privacy of the neighbors living at the front door, located one and a half meters away. It orders the removal of the electronic peephole and condemns the couple to pay 300 euros each. Continue reading
The Supreme Court (TS) considers that the installation of a recording camera on the peephole of a house can be a "relevant impact on the personal and family privacy" of the neighbors if there are no "security problems" in the community and is only used for knowing if anyone is going to deliver "some package." In a judgment, collected by Europa Press, the Civil Chamber dismisses the cassation appeal filed by a couple who were forced to remove the…
The court agrees with the neighbors across the street and considers that the installation of the device is disproportionate if there are no safety reasons.
Coverage Details
Bias Distribution
- 60% of the sources lean Left
Factuality
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
