The Labour Chamber of the High Court of Justice of Navarre (TSJN) has upheld the lawsuit filed by an employee who claimed her right to telework 100% of the day in order to take care of her mother, diagnosed with Alzheimer’s and with a 65% disability.
The judgment, which can be appealed in cassation for the unification of doctrine before the Supreme Court, revokes a ruling of position no. 1 of the Labour Section of the Court of Instance of Pamplona.
THE COMPANY DENIED TELEWORKING BECAUSE SHE DID NOT LIVE WITH HER MOTHER
The applicant, a software engineer in a company since 2006, requested in May 2025 to work in the teleworking mode for 100% of her working day in order to take care of her mother. The company denied her request on the grounds that she did not live with her.
Since the covid-19 pandemic, the appellant and her colleagues had teleworked 100%, but since May 2025 the company required face-to-face work at least two days a week at the request of the main client, the Government of Navarra.
The employee sued the company and requested that her right to telework be recognized throughout the day, in addition to compensation for moral damages and for violation of fundamental rights.
The court of first instance initially dismissed the claim on the grounds that the company had justified its organisational needs and that the worker already enjoyed three days of teleworking and flexible working hours.
THE TSJN CONSIDERS THAT THERE WAS NO REAL NEGOTIATION
The plaintiff then appealed to the TSJN alleging that the company had not complied with the negotiation process required by article 34.8 of the Statute of Workers and that the refusal had been based on a requirement, cohabitation, which is not legally enshrined.
In its ruling, the Labour Chamber acknowledges that the company did not open a real negotiation process before rejecting the request for teleworking, despite the fact that the regulations require it.
«Thus, since there is no evidence in the case at hand that the company complied with the mandatory procedure of article 34.8 of the Workers’ Statute (SW), which requires opening a negotiation (of a maximum duration of 15 days) in which proposals and counter-proposals were made, before giving a negative response, the Chamber considers that the judgment has indeed violated article 34.8 SW in terms of considering the formal procedure completed, which will lead to the upholding of the appeal in terms of the request for the adaptation of the requested working day (in the form of teleworking every day)«, the judges reason.
Thus, the magistrates recognize the worker’s right to telework 100% of the day, although they dismiss her request for compensation both for moral damages and for violation of fundamental rights.
