Legal analysis webinar on the differences between work accidents in the General Regime and RETA

Fraternidad-Muprespa inaugurates the ciclo “Current Events” webinars with…” with the jurist Manuel López Sacristán, lawyer from the Mutua Legal Advice and Services Center, who explained the substantive differences between the treatment of work accidents in the General Social Security Regime (RGSS) and the Special Regime for Self-Employed Workers (RETA). 

The session, which was introduced and moderated by Silvia Vela, director of the Department of Communication and Institutional Relations of the Mutua, was attended by nearly 400 attendees, and addressed the regulatory framework, the jurisprudential casuistry and the evidentiary implications that affect each group. 

Comparative legal framework

The exhibition focused on articles 156 to 158 and 316 of the General Social Security Law (LGSS), as well as Royal Decrees 625/2014 and 1273/2003. López Sacristán stressed that “The definition of a work accident in the General Regime is broader and presumes employment, while the RETA requires a direct and immediate connection with economic activity.”.

In the RGSS, article 156.1 LGSS establishes that a work accident is considered “any bodily injury that the worker suffers on the occasion of or as a consequence of the work carried out as an employee"In addition, section 3 introduces the iuris tantum presumption of employment: "It will be presumed, unless proven otherwise, that the injuries suffered by the worker during the time and at the place of work constitute a work accident.”.

On the contrary, in the RETA, article 316.2 requires that the accident derives “directly and immediately"of self-employment, without said presumption operating."This implies a much more demanding evidentiary burden for the self-employed person.”said the speaker.

Notable jurisprudence

The presentation included a technical analysis of key sentences that illustrate the complexity of recognition of workplace accidents in the RETA:

• STSJ of Castilla y León, rec. 441/2022: establishes the requirements for a self-employed person to prove that a traffic accident derives from their professional activity.
• STS No. 479/2023: in cases of multiple activity, the same injury can be classified as a work accident in the RGSS and as a common illness in the RETA.
• STSJ de Canarias No. 192/2023: excludes as a work accident that suffered by a self-employed person, a physiotherapist, during a break.
• STSJ of Andalusia No. 2485/2019: confirms that the presumption of employment in the RETA does not apply, placing the burden of proof on the worker.

López Sacristán emphasized that “Jurisprudence is precisely delimiting the margins of professional causality in the RETA, but the need to interpret case by case still persists.”.

Paradigmatic cases were also addressed, such as that of a freelance photographer (STSJ Madrid no. 12/2023) whose accident while traveling was recognized as work-related, and that of a painter (STSJ Castilla y León, Sentence 840/2023) whose trip to budget for a work was the subject of legal debate.

Final conclusions

The day concluded with the speaker clarifying various issues raised and conveyed by Silvia Vela, who encouraged all attendees to participate in upcoming webinars. The Mutual Fund, which especially appreciates the assistance of members of the advisory group, will hold new sessions on a monthly basis on legal issues, benefits and other topics of interest.