Are dash cams permitted?

Is it permitted to use in-car cameras (dash cams) that record the entire traffic situation in order to preserve evidence? The Local Court (AG) Munich had to decide on the admissibility of the recorded footage as evidence.In the case to be decided by the court, the plaintiff sought to admit the recordings from his dash cam as evidence.

The decision of the court

The Local Court (AG) Munich decided in its Beschluss vom 13.08.2014; Az. 345 C 5551 /14 against the admissibility of the recordings.

The court took the view that the non-incident-based use of dash cams was in breach of the Bundesdatenschutzgesetz. It clarified that even private individuals are bound by the provisions of the Bundesdatenschutzgesetz and must respect the fundamental right of the General Persönlichkeitsrecht respectively the resulting right to informational self-determination of the other road users.

The court therefore assessed the use of such video cameras in accordance with the provisions of the Bundesdatenschutzgesetz applicable to video surveillance of public places. According to these, video surveillance is only permitted if it is necessary for the protection of legitimate interests and there are no indications that protected interests of the persons affected outweigh such surveillance.

The court took the view that the right to informational self-determination of the person affected outweighed the interest of the party seeking to establish facts in securing evidence. If civil courts were to admit recordings from in-car cameras as evidence, the public disclosure of such data, for example in the cloud, which unlike Facebook does not occur voluntarily, would be removed from any control of the persons affected.

Taken to its logical conclusion, this would result in privately organised comprehensive surveillance, possibly also by cameras attached to clothing, without there being any concrete reason for the recording. In order to justify the interference with the right to informational self-determination of the person recorded, which arises from the data protection-infringing recording, it is necessary for further aspects to be added to the general interest of the party using the camera in securing evidence.

On this point, the court stated that recordings can be assessed differently if they were made from a situation in which the necessity of establishing facts not only appeared possible and was recorded without suspicion, but in which there were concrete indications that judicial establishment of facts was imminent due to serious impairments.

The court also found a violation of the Kunsturhebergesetz. Just one day earlier, the VG Ansbach had ruled similarly in its judgment of 12.08.2014; Az. AN 4 K 13.01634.

Conclusion

Supreme court case law on the permissibility of dash cams is still outstanding. However, according to the judgments of the Local Court (AG) Munich and VG Ansbach, a trend can be discerned among German courts whereby the non-incident-based use of in-car cameras is not permitted.