Workplace Investigations
Contributing Editors
Workplace investigations are growing in number, size and complexity. Employers are under greater scrutiny as of the importance of ESG rises. Regulated industries such as finance, healthcare and legal face additional hurdles, but public scrutiny of businesses and how they treat their people across the board has never been higher. Conducting a fair and thorough workplace investigation is therefore critical to the optimal operation, governance and legal exposure of every business.
IEL’s Guide to Workplace Investigations examines key issues that organisations need to consider as they initiate, conduct and conclude investigations in 29 major jurisdictions around the world.
Learn more about the response taken in specific countries or build your own report to compare approaches taken around the world.
Choose countries
Select specific jurisdictions to filter on
Choose questions
Choose the questions you would like answering, or choose all for the full picture.
08. Can the employer search employees’ possessions or files as part of an investigation?
08. Can the employer search employees’ possessions or files as part of an investigation?
Flag / Icon
India
India
- at Trilegal
- at Trilegal
- at Trilegal
Yes, an employer can search its employees’ official possessions and files as part of an investigation. It may be difficult, however, to seize personal assets or possessions of an employee (such as the individual’s mobile phone or personal laptop).
Employers should expressly create policies that address key issues associated with employee surveillance, forensic searches and investigations, such as:
- whether or not the official assets and infrastructure of the company can be used for personal purposes by employees;
- the organisation's right to monitor, surveil or search any authorised or unauthorised use of its corporate assets; and
- that the employee should not have any expectation of privacy when using the companies’ resources, etc.
Any forensic review of digital data must be carried out with due regard to Indian rules of evidence to avoid situations where such evidence becomes unreliable in a future legal claim or dispute.
Flag / Icon
Switzerland
Switzerland
- at Bär & Karrer
- at Bär & Karrer
The basic rule is that the employer may not search private data during internal investigations.
If there is a strong suspicion of criminal conduct on the part of the employee and a sufficiently strong justification exists, a search of private data may be justified.[1] The factual connection with the employment relationship is given, for example, in the case of a criminal act committed during working hours or using workplace infrastructure.[2]
[1] Claudia Fritsche, Interne Untersuchungen in der Schweiz: Ein Handbuch für regulierte Finanzinstitute und andere Unternehmen, Zürich/St. Gallen 2013, p. 168.
[2] Claudia Fritsche, Interne Untersuchungen in der Schweiz: Ein Handbuch für regulierte Finanzinstitute und andere Unternehmen, Zürich/St. Gallen 2013, p. 168 et seq.
Download your results as a PDF
Download as pdf link
Contributors
Australia
People + Culture Strategies
Austria
GERLACH
Belgium
Van Olmen & Wynant
Brazil
CGM
China
Jingtian & Gongcheng
Finland
Roschier
France
Bredin Prat
Germany
Hengeler Mueller
Greece
Karatzas & Partners
Hong Kong
Slaughter and May
India
Trilegal
Ireland
Ogier
Italy
BonelliErede
Japan
Mori Hamada & Matsumoto
Netherlands
De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek
Nigeria
Bloomfield LP
Philippines
Villaraza & Angangco
Poland
WKB Lawyers
Portugal
Uría Menéndez - Proença de Carvalho
Singapore
Rajah & Tann Singapore
South Korea
Kim & Chang
Spain
Uría Menéndez
Sweden
Mannheimer Swartling
Switzerland
Bär & Karrer
Thailand
Chandler MHM
Turkey
Paksoy
United Kingdom
Slaughter and May
United States
Cravath, Swaine & Moore
Vietnam
Le & Tran Law Corporation
Contributors
India
Trilegal
Switzerland
Bär & Karrer