Facts
The case concerns the question of the admissibility of surveillance of an insured person by a private detective on behalf of a liability insurer. The insured person X. was the victim of a traffic accident and filed a claim for compensation for household damage against the drivers and their liability insurers. To clarify the household damage, the liability insurer E. Insurances commissioned the detective agency F. to conduct surveillance of X. for a certain period of time. X. and his wife Y. (the complainants) then filed a lawsuit against the insurer and the detective agency for violation of their personality rights.
Considerations
The Federal Court states that surveillance of an insured person initiated by a liability insurer can violate their privacy and right to one's own image. However, such a violation is not unlawful if the interest in preventing insurance fraud outweighs the interest of the person concerned in the integrity of their personality.
The Federal Court examines the balancing of interests in the specific case and concludes that the surveillance and the means used (reports, photographs and film) appear necessary and appropriate to clarify the question of whether insurance benefits are to be paid…