The Supreme Court confirms the suicide of a grocery store employee in Cantabria as a piece accident | Economy | EUROtoday

The Supreme Court has confirmed that the suicide of a grocery store chain employee in April 2021 in Cantabria was a piece accident. This is evident from an order from the Social Chamber, which has refused to confess the attraction filed by the corporate in opposition to a earlier ruling by the Superior Court of Justice of this autonomous neighborhood, which thought-about suicide a piece accident and imposed on the mutual the fee of compensation and widow's and orphan's pensions to the spouse and 16-year-old daughter of the deceased.

In that decision, issued somewhat over a yr in the past and which is now changing into closing, the widow's attraction was upheld in opposition to the ruling of Court quantity 3 of Santander, which in the summertime of 2022 concluded that the suicide was not linked to the issues that The man suffered at work however relatively from marital issues and his father's sickness. The Labor Inspection had discovered a causal hyperlink between work and suicide, and identified the dearth of analysis of psychosocial dangers and adoption of preventive measures to get rid of or cut back them by the corporate.

That was one of many the reason why the Cantabrian superior court docket revoked the conclusion of the court docket of first occasion, understanding that the “work-related” issues had a “clear temporal connection” with the suicide. These, in line with the ruling, had begun “just three months before the fatal outcome” and have been “very present in the days prior to the decision to take his own life,” which passed off “three days before” rejoining the supposed.

The account of the occasions signifies that the worker had been sanctioned by the corporate for which he had labored since 2011 – first as a supervisor in a middle in Vitoria (Álava), and since 2020 as supervisor of one of many chain's shops in Santander. , after receiving an nameless criticism about office harassment in opposition to a colleague, which led to her switch to a different grocery store within the Cantabrian city of Laredo.

”The concern in regards to the doable penalties derived from the train of legal motion in opposition to him accompanied him till the day of his demise and this concern has no different trigger than the purely work-related one,” dominated the TSJ judges, who alluded to a number of searches that he carried out. on the web about harassment convictions. Thus, in his opinion, it was “evident that there was a clear connection or relevant causal relationship between the suicidal action and the work.” That is, the work or the circumstances through which the availability of labor providers was carried out was “at the basis of the decision to take one's own life.”

The magistrates emphasised on this sense that the labor issues that started in January 2021, as a consequence of the harassment criticism, “persisted almost until the date of death.” And they understood that the sickness suffered by the employee's father or the issues together with his spouse weren’t related on this case, which “lacked the necessary entity to put an end to the relationship between the spouses.” But “what is really relevant” for the Cantabrian Supreme Court that heard the attraction is that there was no earlier psychiatric historical past or psychological pathologies that would separate the person's demise from the work issues he suffered. For all these causes, the ruling concluded that “the decision to take his own life was closely and more than directly linked to his work and, specifically, to the situation derived from the lawsuit for workplace harassment and the consequences thereof. ”.

Work and non-family causes

Now the Supreme Court, which imposes the fee of 300 euros in prices to the appellant, highlights that the earlier occasion thought-about that these are “conclusive facts in favor of the work accident” and declares the inadmissibility of the grocery store chain's attraction in opposition to that failure. In it, the corporate raised whether or not the demise and survival advantages brought on by the employee who dedicated suicide derive from a piece accident or a standard sickness.

To argue her claims, the appellant introduced a ruling from the Superior Court of Justice of Santa Cruz de Tenerife on the suicide of a financial institution director who was transferred from his workplace, which brought on him an anxiousness disaster. Another of hers was added to this one when her spouse gave beginning, which led to her hospitalization. After her discharge, she loved paternity depart however didn’t return to her place as a result of she took her personal life.

In this case, the demise was motivated by household and work-related stressors, similar to a judicial course of in opposition to his brother, the beginning of his first little one and the hassle related to altering places of work, however the ruling didn’t show that the “ exclusive cause” of demise was work. Thus, for the Supreme Court there’s a lack of contradiction between the in contrast sentences, since they’re completely different instances “with relevant differences regarding the authentic cause of death.”

Follow all the data Economy y Business in Facebook y Xor in our e-newsletter semanal