In this ruling from the Social Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia with appeal number 5720/2022, the case of a person who tries to access the unemployment benefit after leaving prison.

The applicant has a disability level of 80%, which has led her mother to be in charge of managing the subsidy application. After numerous telephone contact attempts to obtain a prior appointment, it was not possible.

Both demonstrate the lack of resources and knowledge to make the electronic application to the SEPE (State Public Employment Service), which is not mandatory for citizens. In this context, it cannot be said that there was negligence on the part of the plaintiff, therefore, the SEPE should not apply in a strictly formalistic manner the current regulations that allow it to deduct the days that have elapsed since the affected person had the material right to receive the subsidy. This decision is also reaffirmed when resolving the previous claim, in which the SEPE is already aware of the material difficulties that the plaintiff has faced.

It is at that moment, in which the SEPE has clear knowledge of the present circumstances, when it should have taken into account the rights of the beneficiary, which must guide the actions of said body as part of the public administration. We refer to your obligation to provide assistance in the use of electronic means to interested parties and, even more importantly, to respect the right of natural persons to choose at all times whether they communicate with public administrations to exercise their rights and obligations through electronic means or not. This ruling shows that this right was violated, even involuntarily, by imposing insurmountable obstacles for the plaintiff, such as prior appointment, which caused her harm contrary to both constitutional and legal regulations, which requires an interpretation that guarantees effective service to citizens and effectiveness in meeting the established objectives.

Faced with an exceptional situation such as the pandemic, which required a significant and understandable limitation on the exercise of the plaintiff's rights, the SEPE should have applied the principle of proportionality and chosen the least restrictive measure to evaluate the claimed right. Since it did not do so in this way, it should have interpreted the unemployment regulations in the most favorable sense for the beneficiary, in accordance with the provisions of article 106.2 of the Constitution, and recognized that the delay in requesting the benefit was due to the material difficulties imposed by the administration. This should have led to the recognition of the benefit without any discount on its duration.

Failed: The SEPE resolution is revoked, with the corresponding recognition of having the right to receive unemployment benefit for release from prison for a total duration of 540 days, without any discount for the delay in requesting the benefit.