Mehmedovic v Switzerland concerned the surveillance of Mr Mehmedovic and, indirectly, his wife, in public areas by investigators from an insurance company, with a view to ascertaining whether his claim for compensation, lodged following an accident, was justified.

Mr and Ms Mehmedovic complained about the fact that they had been placed under surveillance, relying on Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the Convention.

The court found no appearance of a violation of Article 8 of the Convention and held that the application was manifestly ill-founded. In the first place, the court noted that the insurance company’s investigations, which had been conducted from a public place and were confined to ascertaining Mr Mehmedovic’s mobility, were aimed solely at protecting the insurer’s pecuniary rights.

In this connection, the court held, as it had in the previous case of Verliere v Switzerland, that the domestic courts had found that the insurer had an overriding interest that meant that the interference with the applicant’s personality rights was lawful.

Secondly, the court noted that the sparse information concerning Ms Mehmedovic, which had been gathered coincidentally and was of no relevance for the investigation, in no way constituted systematic or permanent gathering of data. In the court’s view, there had therefore been no interference with this applicant’s private life.