The judicial authorities have dismissed in full the appeal filed by the former Administrative Director of several companies belonging to Monpex, the company that manages outdoor advertising in Maspalomas by agreement with the San Bartolomé de Tirajana City Council and which ratifies the appropriateness of the disciplinary dismissal of the worker.
The proven facts, confirmed by the Court, date back to December 2012, but the judgment was issued a few months ago. At that time, Monpex's management, suspecting the disclosure of confidential data and breach of employment obligations by the administrative director, commissioned an expert report from an external IT specialist. Previously, on December 21, 2012, the legal representative of one of the group's companies had requested the presence of a notary to access the work computer assigned to the finance director. The notary certified the sending of emails containing the group's client databases to an external IT services company.
The computer forensics expert conducted two visits to the company's facilities: the first on May 14, 2013, during which he performed a partial backup of the main hard drive of the computer assigned to the executive and analyzed the installed software to detect secure remote access programs for external servers. The second visit took place on May 16, 2013, during which he installed monitoring software on a second company computer to analyze the executive's computer and user activity.
Following the complaint filed by the defendant company on July 08, 2013, before the Provincial Brigade of Judicial Police (Specialized and Violent Crime Unit, Technological Crimes Group) of the Superior Police Headquarters of the Canary Islands, for a crime of discovery and disclosure of secrets against the administrative director and against the head of the external entity, the management of Monpex continued to monitor the activity of the manager's equipment and user until the end of September 2013 through the monitoring software, which allowed the collection of information, instant and precise control over sessions and processes on terminal servers and virtual desktops, event diagnosis and monitoring.
The investigation, both by the police and internally, revealed that the computer assigned to the executive was the only one with special security measures: the default browser was configured not to store any traces of web pages or cookies, and the operating system was programmed so that deleted files were not sent to the recycle bin, making recovery difficult. It was also established that on November 26, 2012, using the company computer, the executive sent the entire customer database of the Business Group from his company email to the email address of the head of the external entity.
On June 19, 2013, he recorded information from the corporate server (directories containing all sensitive company information, accessible only to the administrative director, the accounting employee, and the group's management) onto an external storage device. He downloaded folders and files related to workforce reduction plans (EREs) implemented in 2010 and 2012 at one of the group's companies, including the case of a former employee, as well as all payroll records.
On June 19, 2013, he forwarded an email to the head of the external entity, which included emails exchanged with the Group's labor advisor, mocking her. On June 25, 2013, he copied information from the corporate server onto an external storage device, including folders/files related to bank transfers, reports to management, shareholders, objectives, payroll, employee records, tax matters, quality system, workforce reduction plans for a group company, workplace harassment, advertising, etc. On June 26, 2013, he sent an email from his company account to his personal email account, transmitting all the email addresses of clients and suppliers of the various companies within the group.
The dismissal was declared justified by the Social Court No. 3 of Las Palmas in a judgment of January 13, 2015, as it did not find a violation of fundamental rights (privacy, secrecy of communications) due to the illegality of the evidence, the Court confirming that the company's control (copying the computer and monitoring with specific software) was proportional, necessary and suitable given the seriousness of the indications and the concealment by the worker. Despite this firm ruling, the criminal proceedings were delayed, concluding in 2023 with the acquittal of the executive in the first instance by the Criminal Court No. 3 of Las Palmas (October 11, 2021), confirmed by the Provincial Court (March 01, 2023), considering the expert evidence unlawful (unauthorized access by the computer expert without judicial authorization, with a contaminating effect on the seizure of devices and police analysis), even though the labor jurisdiction had already positively assessed said evidence.
Based on this acquittal, the executive filed an appeal with the Supreme Court, which was dismissed in May 2024 as untimely, having exceeded the five-year statute of limitations established by the Civil Procedure Law. Finally, on March 3, 2024, the plaintiff filed a claim for the protection of fundamental rights, which was dismissed by the Social Chamber of the High Court of Justice of the Canary Islands. The judgment of the High Court of Justice of the Canary Islands, referenced in the text, is dated November 28, 2025, and was made public in 2026.
