The Superior Court of Justice of Aragon has given the reason to social security and refuses to grant the pension of Total permanent disability For his profession to a social worker with various physical sequelae produced after suffering an accident. For the court, existing injuries do not disable it for its usual profession, since it can perform the essential functions of its trade with some limitations.
The woman, who works in an elderly residence, had An accident on the way to work which caused a trauma with bone multifactures (open fracture of its left forearm, its ninth right rib, the vertebra L1, and multiple fractures-subsection in the left foot), which generated some organic and functional limitations.
You may be interested
Social security denies permanent disability to a painter because “he had not quoted enough” and justice orders the absolute
Social Security denies permanent disability to a cancer cleansing when considering that “it can continue working” and justice orders to grant the absolute
Specifically, as stated in Judgment 665/2025, it was on May 19, 2022 when the National Social Security Institute (INSS) declared that their injuries were permanent non -invalidant, granting a total compensation of 3,300 euros. The following month, it was declared suitable with restrictions by the Prevention Prevention Service Previntegral, although it was indicated that it should avoid the transfer of patients.
The worker, despite this, requested the permanent disability, but was denied by the INSS. Therefore, he rejoined his job although shortly after a new work decline began that lasted 15 months, from September 28, 2022 to December 3, 2023. After obtaining the medical discharge, he joined as a social worker in an association of Alzheimer’s patients, where he has been working since August 2024.
“It has sufficient capacity to face the core of its work activity”
The Single Social Court of Huesca dismissed the demand of the worker in which he requested to benefit from a total permanent disability derived from an accident at work for his usual social worker profession. Against this sentence, the employee decided to file an appeal for supplication before the Superior Court of Justice of Aragon, although he has been dismissed again, denying the granting of the pension.
The worker insisted on giving priority to an expert report that presented in relation to the loss of force, but the court indicates “that it has not been reinforced by complementary evidence that objectifies it.” In addition, they recalled that the total permanent disability (collected in article 194.4 of the General Social Security Law), is one that disables the worker for all or the fundamental tasks of his usual profession, provided that he can devote himself to a different one. Thus, this degree occurs when basic tasks cannot perform with a minimum of security and efficiency, or when performing them generates additional risks or continuous suffering from pain.
In this sense, the Court expresses that “Views the accredited limitations there is no permanent inability for all the functions of its social worker, which does not require great efforts, and being that the foreign prevention service itself has declared it with limitations, it must avoid transfers of patients. But except for this restriction, it can perform the work of its trade and in fact after the denial of the permanent disability of the permanent incapacity of the permanent incapacity reincorporated to his job. ”
In addition, they added that their work “does not demand a high intensity load of the raquis (one of the injuries left by the accident), retaining the active joint balance at the cervical and lumbar level. It retains the complete strength and mobility of upper limbs except the limitation indicated in the left hand, so it has sufficient capacity to face the nucleus of its work activity.”
Therefore, the Superior Court of Justice of Aragon dismissed the appeal filed by the employee and fully confirmed the judgment of the Single Social Court of Huesca, denining the pension of total permanent disability. Against this judgment, a appeal for the unification of doctrine before the Supreme Court was to file.