An administrative worker with Parkinson’s has seen how Social Security denied him absolute permanent disability, and also severe disability, because he was already an ordinary retirement pensioner when the causative event was established, that is, upon reaching his retirement age. The Superior Court of Justice of Galicia agrees with Social Security, understanding that at that time he was already receiving his retirement and met the requirements to access that pension.
The worker had requested permanent disability on July 14, 2022, but on February 28, 2023, Social Security recognized his retirement pension. Later, on April 19, 2023, the opinion of the Disability Assessment Team was issued, which proposed a total permanent disability derived from a common illness. Even so, Social Security denied it, considering that both pensions were incompatible with each other.
That was precisely the core of the litigation. The affected person argued that his request for disability had been prior to his retirement request and that, therefore, the file should be resolved and he should be recognized as having at least absolute permanent disability. He also maintained that the lower court ruling had not fully responded to his claim. But the Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of Galicia rejects this approach and maintains that the file was processed and that there was no omissive inconsistency. In fact, remember that the medical examination, the summary report and the proposed opinion of the EVI were included.
The key is in the date of the causative event
The ruling explains that, when the permanent disability is not preceded by a temporary disability, the causative event is located on the date of the proposed EVI opinion. In this case, that moment was April 19, 2023. And by then the worker had already recognized ordinary retirement. The court summarizes it clearly: “the date of the event causing the permanent disability must be set in the EVI opinion” and on that date “the actor was already a beneficiary of a retirement pension.”
From there, article 195.1 of the General Social Security Law comes into play, where it explains that “the right” to permanent disability derived from common contingencies will not be recognized when the beneficiary, on the date of the causative event, is of legal retirement age and meets the requirements to access that pension. The Court also adds that the worker greatly exceeded the required deficiency, with more than 43 years of contributions, so he had the right to ordinary retirement at age 65. Law 27/2011 establishes the ordinary retirement age based on the years of contributions.
The TSJ also rules out that the exception that allows the causative event to be established on the date of application could be applied. This possibility only operates when the injuries were already irreversible and consolidated and there is also an abnormal delay in the EVI’s ruling, something that, according to the resolution, “is not the case.”
Finally, the magistrates reject that in April 2023 there was a situation of absolute permanent disability or great disability. According to the ruling, it was not proven that he had “his working capacity completely abolished” or that he needed help from third parties for the essential acts of daily life. Therefore, it dismisses the appeal and fully confirms the previous resolution.