Selection of relevant sentences that may be of interest to use as contrast sentences,
mainly in matters of Social Security and labor law.
You will also find summaries of current and non-perishable regulations.
You can interact with these posts in the Assessor's Corner
Discussion Forum
It declares the dismissal void because it considers that there was discrimination that violated the worker's right to equality.
Appeal 5313/2023 is resolved, filed against the ruling of the Social Court No. 8 of Barcelona, with case number 928/2021.
A worker, a supervisor in the company, asked his boss (manager) for a meeting that was held by videoconference. During this, the worker informed him that he was having nightmares, hearing voices and having recurring dreams about a Muslim woman who
In the dismissal letter it is not necessary to justify whether the dismissal is reasonable; in the trial the company will have to prove that there are actually causes that justify the dismissal.
The appeal for the unification of doctrine filed by the company is resolved, against the ruling of May 24, 2021 of the Superior Court of Justice of Madrid (rec. Suplicación 278/2021), which resolved the appeal filed by the worker, Mr. Máximo, against the ruling of the Social
The Court rejects the business interpretation of starting leave on the day of the causative event and defends the right of workers to adjust their start based on their conciliation needs.
The lawsuit filed by three unions against a group of automobile service companies in the Collective Conflict procedure 167/2024 is resolved. All of the defendant companies are subject to their own Collective Agreement.
November 29, 2023, these companies issued an internal note to regulate the enjoyment of certain
The right of a worker to modify her schedule in alternate weeks to care for her daughter under joint custody is recognized.
The Appeal Appeal 115/2024 filed by the worker against the ruling of the Social Court No. 11 of Bilbao, dated July 4, 2023, is resolved, procedure “Other individual labor rights”.
Mrs. Paulina, employee since 2012 of an international chain selling furniture and home accessories in Barakaldo,She is divorced and shares custody of her 12-year-old daughter on
The lack of specification of the duration of the trial period expressed as “according to agreement” It violates the worker's right to know its exact duration, making the contractual clause invalid and classifying the termination of the contract as unfair dismissal.
The appeal for the unification of doctrine is resolvedfiled against the ruling issued on November 23, 2022 by the Social Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of Madrid (Rec. Suplication No. 679/2022), filed against the ruling dated
The Court considers that the company acted diligently.
Appeal No. 180/2024 is resolved on the ruling of the Social Court No. 36 of Madrid (records No. 539/2023), matter of dismissal and claim for amount.
Mr. Adolfo, had been providing services for the defendant company as a driver since March 11, 2023. The company notified him of his dismissal effective March 27, 2023, alleging unjustified absences.
The company notified the dismissal on several occasions, through a digital platform, but Mr. Adolfo
The Court determines that the burden of proof regarding the working day falls on the company.
Appeal number 1038/23 is resolved, against the ruling of the Social Court No. 45 of Madrid (orders No. 320/2023).
Mr. Cándido, a hostel worker, sued his company for payment of unpaid overtime and night hours between March and November 2022. Employed part-time since 2015, he claims a total of 67,036.12 euros plus interest. The company alleged the closure of the business as a reason
The Court ratifies the compensated termination of the contract and increases the compensation for violation of fundamental rights to 20,000 euros, describing the business conduct as serious and persistent.
The appeal number 218/2024 filed by both parties is resolved, in relation to the ruling issued by the Social Court No. 3 of Malaga on a case of protection of fundamental rights.
The worker began providing services as a security guard for the defendant company on January 19, 2018. On April
The worker alleges violation of fundamental rights and requests an annulment while the company maintains that it believed she was on medical leave. The dismissal is declared unfair.
Appeal is resolved 1135/2024 filed by the legal representation of Ms. Danitza, against ruling 88/2024 issued by the Social Court No. 6 of Oviedo, in the dismissal procedure 810/2023.
Mrs. Danitza provided services as a waitress, with a full-time indefinite contract with a seniority date of 10/1/2021, being the Collective Agreement
The ruling highlights the worker's failure to comply with his contractual obligations and violation of the principle of good faith that governs labor relations.
Appeal No. 1112/2024 is resolved, against the judgment issued by the Social Court No. 3 of Ciudad Real (orders No. 655/2023).
The worker provided services as a stretcher bearer in an ICU ambulance, with an indefinite contract and a seniority of January 1, 2009. On May 13, 2020, he requested a reduction of working hours
