He Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia rejects the appeal presented by an unemployedfor making the unemployment benefit perceived improperly. The reason was that in the last work done by others, her employer was her husband, which was incompatible according to article 12 of the General Social Security Law.
The plaintiff requested the contributory benefit for unemployment to the SEPE, which was approved on April 13, 2021 with a Duration of 240 days (about 8 months). After exhausting the benefit and continuing in unemployment, he asked the SEPE for the subsidy for the exhaustion of the contributory benefit, which was also approved. Subsequently, at the end of this subsidy, he requested his extension, which was granted under the same conditions (this subsidy is extended every six months).
Despite this normality, the Sepe detected an error when reviewing the benefit and discovered that The beneficiary had been working in her husband’s companywith whom he lived in the same family unit along with his minor children. This is incompatible, since according to the 12th of the General Law of Social Security (LGSS), the people who work for their spouse cannot be considered alien -employed if they live with it, except proof to the contrary.
Thus and after verifying this situation, the SEPE determined that the plaintiff did not meet the requirements to have received the benefit or subsidy. Therefore, he was notified that he had to return the unduly perceived amounts, which amounted to 3,893 euros In addition to suspending the subsidy. Not satisfied, this woman decided to put a lawsuit against the SEPE.
Hid information to collect the benefit
First, the Social Court number 1 of Barcelona, after assessing, The SEPE decided to give reason and confirmed the obligation to return the amounts perceived improperly. The sentence explains that the plaintiff could not be considered a worker on behalf of others due to her relationship with the businessman (her husband), which made the collection of unemployment benefit incompatible.
In addition, the court reminds the unemployed that he never informed the SEPE of The employment relationship between employee and employerso it was not a simple administrative error of the SEPE, but a Information concealment by the beneficiary. The unemployed decided to go to the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia (TSJCAT) by putting an appeal for supplication.
Forced to return unemployment benefit
In the TSJ of Catalonia, this woman tried to appeal explaining that the body could not claim the return, since she had acted in good faith when requesting the benefit and that the possible error had been administrative. In addition, he cited the Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)in the Cakarevic vs. case Croatia (Stedh of April 26, 2018), where it was ruled that the return of undue benefits cannot be a disproportionate burden for the beneficiary.
Despite this jurisprudence, the TSJ was not right, forcing it to return the 3,893 euros charged improperly, since The necessary circumstances were not given to apply the teash doctrine. And it could not be applied for three reasons. The first was because he never informed the SEPE of his relationship with the employer, but it was the Sepe who realized this irregularity and incompatibility.
On the other hand, it was not shown that the return of the money would place it in a situation of extreme economic vulnerabilitysomething that is key to applying the jurisprudence of the ECHR. Finally, Spanish legislation clearly establishes the incompatibility of the benefit in these cases, so the revocation and reimbursement were adjusted to law.
Therefore, the worker must return the money charged unduly, although as the sentence ends, he has the possibility of a last attempt to present a appeal before the Supreme Court for the unification of doctrine.