The Social Chamber of the Supreme Court has ruled that the myocardial infarction that caused the death of a teleworking employee at her home, within her flexible working hours, constitutes an accident at work. This decision overturns the previous ruling by the High Court of Justice of Madrid, which had classified it as a domestic or non-work-related accident due to insufficient proof of it occurring during working hours.

The ruling emphasizes that, in such cases, the burden of proof regarding whether the incident occurred during working hours rests with the employer and the Accident Mutual insurance, not with the employee or her family. Therefore, the presumption of work-relatedness under Article 156.3 of the General Law on Social Security is applied, which presumes injuries sustained by the worker during work time and at the workplace to be work accidents, unless proven otherwise.

The deceased, a senior administrative technician, worked remotely on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays with flexible hours between 9:00 AM and 7:00 PM, including an unfixed lunch break. In February 2022, she was found deceased at her home around 3:00 PM, with the autopsy determining the cause of death as cardiogenic shock due to acute myocardial infarction.

The Supreme Court clarifies that the presumption of work-relatedness is applicable to teleworkers, even for sudden illnesses like heart attacks, provided work time and location conditions are met. In this instance, the company and the Mutual failed to prove that the employee had finished her shift or started her lunch break by 3:00 PM. The finding that she died with an empty stomach is considered a key indicator supporting the presumption that she was working.

Consequently, the high court's ruling reinstates the decision of the Court of Social Affairs number 33 of Madrid, which upheld the claim of the deceased's partner and ordered FREMAP MUTUA to pay the death and survival benefit, with the Social Security as a subsidiary guarantor.