Social security denies the permanent disability pension to a home employee with chronic alcoholism since the age of 20: justice supports it

Social security denies the permanent disability pension to a home employee with chronic alcoholism since the age of 20: justice supports it

The Superior Court of Justice of Andalusia has dismissed the demand of a home employee against the National Social Security Institute (INSS), after They would denied a pension for permanent disability even though he suffered chronic alcoholism since he was 20 years old (in addition to other physical ailments). Justice considers that alleged ailments do not reach enough degree to prevent him from developing the fundamental tasks of his usual profession.

As stated in the November 2024 ruling, released by Professor Francisco Trujillo on LinkedIn, the last hiring of women were as a home employee (from 2021 to 2023) and, according to their working life, had been in High situation in Social Security for 3,508 days. Likewise, it remained registered in unemployment 2,426 days from September 9, 2014 until April 5, 2023. In fact, When he requested permanent disability, he was registered as a job seeker.

Going to her medical history, the woman suffered chronic alcoholism from the age of 20, with multiple hospital income due to crises related to her dependence and episodes of self -collithic ideation. Among them, in February 2021, he entered the Emergencies for “Persistent Autolytic Ideation, Symptoms of Abstinence and Excessive Alcohol Consumption.”

In May of that same month, it was hospitalized in a mental health unit after trying to self -collide in a state of ethyl poisoning (consumed about 7 liters of beer per day). The clinical judgment was “anxious depressive syndrome. IMV without autolytic purpose “, and other diagnoses:” Alcohol dependence syndrome, substance consumption disorder. ” In addition to alcoholism, it also presented other physical ailments, including fibromyalgic syndrome, severe osteoarthritis, and psychiatric disorders related to anxiety and depression.

The INSS denies the permanent disability

In July 2022, the woman requested the recognition of a permanent disability. The February 2023 medical report diagnosed “alcohol dependence syndrome, substance consumption disorder, fibromyalgic syndrome and polyartrosis.” However, that same month, The INSS dismissed his request for three reasons:

  • “For not achieving the injuries suffering from a sufficient degree of decreased work capacity to be constituting a permanent disability.”
  • “For not being high or in a situation assimilated to that of the discharge in Social Security on the date of the event causing the benefit” (one of the requirements to collect this pension).
  • “For not gathering the minimum quote period of 15 years to cause the right to pension for permanent disability in the degrees of absolute permanent disability for all work or great disability, in a situation of non -high, or meet the requirement that at least one Fifth of that period is included within 10 years immediately prior to the date of the causative fact ”.

The worker claims, but justice dismisses her demand

On April 10, 2024, the employee challenged the decision of the INSS through an administrative claim, which was denied in July 2023. Therefore, filed a lawsuit to achieve absolute permanent disability (Or, subsidiarily, the total), but was dismissed by the Social Court number 14 of Seville in April 2024.

According to this court, the pathologies he presented did not permanently limit their functional capacity to carry out their usual profession, and He could perform the fundamental tasks of his profession during intercritical periods. During the reacted phases, it could be susceptible to a temporary disability, but not a permanent.

After this ruling, the former home employee, who was unemployed, filed an appeal for the Superior Court of Justice of Andalusia, claiming that the pathologies and functional limitations that he suffered did justify the recognition of a permanent disability (he stated that they were more Serious of what determined the judgment of instance), based on article 194 of the General Social Security Law (LGSS).

The TSJ of Andalusia, in the analysis of the case, presented, on the one hand, that The plaintiff had not used the appropriate procedural routes to question the conclusions of the medical report. Likewise, “and since it does not appear that the pathologies presented by the worker produces other functional limitations that described in the resolution fought,” the court concluded, as the instance sentence had made, “that The same (pathologies) They are not enough to prevent the appellant, in a permanent way, to carry out the fundamental tasks of their usual profession (…), which may carry out the insured, at least in intercritical periods, without prejudice to the fact that in reacudization phases it can be the subsidiary plaintiff of temporary disability. ”

Thus, the TSJ of Andalusia failed that the instance sentence had not committed the infractions that were imputed to him, confirming it and denying, consequently, the recognition of the permanent disability.