The Law of Civil Procedures, in article 265.15, describes the validity of the investigation report provided by the private detective:

Every lawsuit or dispute must be accompanied by, amongst others:

“The report, elaborated by professionals of private investigation that are legally authorised, about relevant facts on which they support their subject of suit. On these facts, if they were not recognised as veritable, attesting evidence will be practiced.”

Private detectives are:

“means of evidence, of habitual use and, on occasions, an instrument given exclusivity for the efficient control by the business person over the demandable duties of the worker" (Supreme Court, sentence of 6th November 1990)

"Logically, the testimony given by private detectives, in favour of its veracity, not only the guarantee of demandable professionalism and, in principal also presumable, in a profession that is legally regalement, but also in that, undeniably, it provides the precise and continued dedication to the object of the ulterior testimony to be given and the complementary graphic and sound accreditations that usually accompany it". (Supreme Court, sentence of 6th November 1990)

"The court for administrative suits of the Supreme Court considers it to be legal that a public organism contacts private detectives to investigate its civil servants during their working time and that this does not breach their right of privacy". (Supreme Court, sentence of 12th May 1998