She fell on the bus on her way home and lost the college: The court confesses an accident at work

The Supreme Court of Justice has been uttered again on a concept An accident at homeAs mentioned on the road or, more strict, an accident In Itinere (One happens outside the place and the time of work, but during the “Home Action” course it is usually used by the worker to move between his residence and the workplace, or vice versa), hated a consistent interpretation in the absent sense of rules Labor law.

Written by Roy Borges Pereira *

This time, this type of professional incident was dealt with in the last ruling of that court, regarding the incidents that continue to contain it with the work relationship, even if it is taking place outside the workplace.

O case:

In the case, the recognition of an accident occurred during the worker’s path, after the end of his work hours.

short, The complexity was the fact that the worker fell on the bus on his way home and after stopping to buy the hands of the hands, and at the end of the kidneys at the end.

STJ confirmed the decision of Lisbon’s relationship, which qualified the event as an accident at work. The president, who usually used the bus as a means of transportation, decided to boycott the road to meet personal needs: stopped in a store to buy a towel and stayed about twenty minutes for the mobile phone before heading to a supermarket where he got goods for dinner. Resuming the usual road, suffering from falling inside the bus, due to sudden braking.

Basics:

The main question that was discussed was the compatibility of these interruptions with the concept of “usually used path” and ultimately h down as a protected path, that is, if that is outside the stronghold of the risk inherent to Employment contract.

The Supreme Court has already repeated the unified trend: the accident In Itinere It is an extension of legal protection, justified by the risks inherent in traveling to the workplace or at the workplace. This danger, although outside the place and working hours, is associated with the work of carrying out the work.

In the analysis of the specific case, the reasonable court of the worker’s behavior and the nature of interruptions – which are consistent with the demands of family life and the natural standards of personal organization. Thus, it was understood that the deviations were not incompatible, and did not distort the way as usual. Moreover, once the usual path is resumed, the risk of traveling is due to legal protection.

conclusion:

This understanding is particularly relevant in the current context, as displacement processes and multifunctional behaviors in the daily work life have become increasingly common. The higher decision confirms that the analysis of each issue must depend on the criteria of reasonable and social adequacy, and not in an accurate literal reading of the rule.

For those who work ” court From work, “especially for lawyers, this ruling enhances that the main concept is” reasonable “effectively.

For companies and entities that bear the responsibility of human resources management, this ruling enhances the importance of knowing the legal features of the professional accident system, including those that occur outside the usual workplace. The correct qualification of these events may have related effects on the duties of responsibility and coverage by insurance companies, companies and employers.

* Financial lawyer CBA legal advisers.

Legal warning: This article is just useful and its content cannot be considered providing legal services or consulting of any kind. This article, by its nature, in general, abstract and does not apply directly to any specific case, so it is not used with a properly qualified professional consultation, and the reader should not behave or fail to act by returning to its content.