The Supreme Court establishes that the period worked as a self-employed person before 2004 cannot be taken into account to distribute the payment of a permanent disability resulting from an occupational disease. The key, as the ruling explains, is that in those years there was no specific coverage of professional contingencies in the RETA, so that time cannot be included when distributing responsibility between Social Security and mutual insurance companies.
This ruling, STS 5345/2025 (can be consulted at this link of the Judiciary) analyzes the case that affects a truck mechanic to whom the court recognized a total permanent disability derived from an occupational disease due to bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. The lower court ruling gave him the right to a lifetime pension of 75% of a monthly regulatory base of 1,481.78 euros. In addition, the worker had alternated periods in the General Regime with more than 8,600 days as self-employed between 1992 and 2016.
Upon reaching the Supreme Court, it was clear that the worker had the right to permanent disability, because that part had already been finalized, but there was debate about how the payment should be distributed between the INSS and the mutual insurance companies that insured professional risk in different periods.
The Supreme Court corrects the TSJ of Murcia
The Superior Court of Justice of Murcia had understood that Social Security should also assume the part corresponding to the time in which the worker was in the RETA before 2004. With this criterion, it established a distribution of 88.467% for the INSS, 8.887% for Ibermutua, 1.442% for Asepeyo and 0.204% for Fraternidad-Muprespa.
Now, the Supreme Court corrects this interpretation by understanding that this issue had already been resolved in other previous resolutions and reiterates that, before 2004, the self-employed did not have specific protection for professional contingencies in the RETA. That is why he states that this period cannot be included in the distribution of responsibilities.
In fact, the High Court says so expressly by stating that “the period prior to January 1, 2004 cannot include the distribution of responsibilities.” He also emphasizes that the Compensation Fund did not have to cover this risk because “it was not funded by any contributions or premiums” from these workers.
The occupational disease is distributed according to the time of exposure to risk
The ruling also explains that in occupational diseases, the causative event develops over time. Therefore, responsibility must be distributed among the entities that covered the risk according to the worker’s exposure period. In the words of the Supreme Court, the occupational disease “develops over time.”
Applying this doctrine, the Supreme Court upholds the INSS appeal, annuls the ruling of the TSJ of Murcia on that point and establishes a new distribution of 6,246 countable days. The final result leaves 82.70% for the INSS, 14.60% for Ibermutua, 2.37% for Asepeyo and 0.33% for Fraternidad-Muprespa. The rest of the ruling remains intact, including the recognition of total permanent disability.