Trot-b has understood that the company cannot be held responsible for domestic accidents during the Ministry of the Interior
Summary
The work court denied compensation to an employee of the voucher who suffered a knee injury after the bite of his dog while working in the Ministry of the Interior, resulting in that the accident had no link with the professional activity.
The work court denied the Application for allowance of an employee of the valley that has undergone a knee injury after being bite from his dog while working remotely. The Senior operational analyst said that the company should have provided indications on the risks of maintenance of pets in the environment of the Ministry of the Interior and that he had requested a repair for moral and material damage.
According to the worker’s report, the accident occurred when his dog, who was lying on his leg, made a sudden movement, reaching his foot and causing the twist of the left knee. As a result, he had to undergo surgery.
The compensation request was rejected by the 2nd panel of the Bahia regional work court (Trot-Ba), which confirmed the decision of the Labor Court of Senhor Do Bonfim. Judge Flávia Muniz Martins stressed that there was no relationship between the professional activity exercised by the employee and the accident, rejecting Vale’s responsibility.
According to the magistrate, the domestic environment is of the responsibility of the worker himself and the company cannot be held responsible for domestic risks. In addition, an expert discovered that the employee already had a pre -existing health condition, a degenerative disopatia and that the knee injury was not related to their professional activities.
Receive the main news directly on WhatsApp! Sign up for the Earth channel
Judge José Cairo Júnior, a rapporteur of the case, ranked the worker attempt to blame the company as “unusual and without a reasonable legal basis”. He underlined that, in the regime of the Ministry of the Interior, the work environment is managed by the employee himself, without the control of the employer, and that the responsibility of the company could be recognized only if there was a direct link between the accident and the function performed, which has not been identified in the case.
With this, the Trot-5 confirmed the decision of the first instance, denying any Vale responsibility for the accident occurred in the employee’s residence.
Source: Terra
Rose James is a Gossipify movie and series reviewer known for her in-depth analysis and unique perspective on the latest releases. With a background in film studies, she provides engaging and informative reviews, and keeps readers up to date with industry trends and emerging talents.
