fingervilla.blogg.se - Use of computers at work 2015

#USE OF COMPUTERS AT WORK 2015 MANUAL#
#USE OF COMPUTERS AT WORK 2015 TRIAL#
#USE OF COMPUTERS AT WORK 2015 PASSWORD#
#USE OF COMPUTERS AT WORK 2015 FREE#

#USE OF COMPUTERS AT WORK 2015 TRIAL#

Accordingly, the trial Court dismissed the charges against Mr.

#USE OF COMPUTERS AT WORK 2015 FREE#

Cole had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of his work-issued laptop computer thus, the warrantless search violated his section 8 Charter right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. Furthermore, the trial Court decided the evidence should be excluded under section 24 of the Charter. Cole argued that because of this breach, admitting any evidence obtained from the warrantless search into the criminal proceedings would “bring the administration of justice into disrepute”, and that the Court should therefore exclude such evidence as required by section 24 of the Charter.Īt the trial, the Court agreed that Mr. Cole argued that he had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of the laptop computer, and that by searching his laptop without a warrant the police had breached his right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure as protected by section 8 of the Charter. Mr. Cole criminally with possession of child pornography and unauthorized use of the employer’s computer. The technician notified the school principal and copied the photos to a CD. The principal seized the laptop, and a second technician copied the temporary Internet files containing pornographic images to a second disc. The employer then handed the laptop and both discs over to the police. The police, without a warrant, viewed the images and created a mirror image of the hard drive for the purposes of their criminal investigation. Cole’s laptop computer, a technician found a hidden folder containing nude and partially nude photos of an underage female student. While performing routine maintenance on Mr. Cole kept personal photos, financial records, tax records and information about property he owned on the laptop.

#USE OF COMPUTERS AT WORK 2015 PASSWORD#

Cole’s laptop computer was password protected, but users and technicians with administration rights could access it. The school knew that its teachers kept a great deal of personal information on their computers Mr. The Acceptable Use Policy – written for and signed by students – also applied to teachers this policy restricted the acceptable uses of school laptops, but also warned users not to expect privacy in their files. Mr.

#USE OF COMPUTERS AT WORK 2015 MANUAL#

The Manual stipulated that teachers’ e-mail correspondence remained private, but was subject to access by school administrators if specified conditions were met. The Manual did not address privacy in other types of files, but did state that “all data and messages generated on or handled by board equipment are considered to be the property of the school board”. Cole – to use its computers for incidental personal use.

The Board’s Policies and Procedures Manual allowed employees – like Mr. Cole was a high school teacher employed by a School Board. The Board issued him a laptop computer, but retained ownership of it.

rigorously implement these policies, including ensuring employees are well aware of and fully understand them, and stringently enforce the policy by monitoring and auditing usage as warranted.

promulgate policies covering use of e-mails and social networking in the workplace, clearly stating that NO personal usage is permitted and that the employer will monitor all employee usage and.

On Octothe Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) decided that a teacher criminally charged with possession of child pornography and unauthorized use of a computer had a reasonable – though diminished – expectation of privacy in Internet files containing pornographic images on his work-issued laptop computer. The SCC found that the employer’s workplace policies, procedures and technology did reduce employees’ privacy expectations, but did not eliminate it. On balance, the “totality of the circumstances” supported the objective reasonableness of the teacher’s expectation of privacy in the Internet images, although he had no expectation of privacy in the nude pictures of a student stored on the laptop. The police had thus breached the teacher’s right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure under section 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms ( Charter) when it searched the computer without a warrant. Despite this, the SCC found the evidence should be admitted in the teacher’s criminal trial.īased on this decision, employers wishing to eliminate or severely limit employees’ expectation of privacy in their use and contents of work-issued laptops and other electronic devices must: