Incidence of cardiac disease in work accidents. Repercussion of the Judgment of the fourth room of the Supreme Court number 325/2018, of March 1, 2018. Resource 2942/2016

Abstract

If it is difficult for medical science to identify the triggers of a specific vascular process, the difficulties encountered by jurists when faced with the different events generating social security benefits due to cardio-vascular diseases are not to be underestimated. Has the iuris tamtum status of the rebuttable presumption contained in section three of article 156 of the Consolidated Text of the General Social Security Act (hereinafter LGSS) been distorted? Are we faced with a generalisation of the terms time and place of work in order to qualify a concrete fact such as an accident at work? Is there any real insurance against heart attacks? These and other issues will be addressed in this paper beginning with the analysis of one of the most recent and controversial rulings of the Fourth Chamber, the judgment issued on March 1, 2018 in the Appeal for reversal for doctrine unification 2942/2016.