Judicial Ruling Supports Widow's Pension Claim
The Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Catalunya (TSJC) has made a significant ruling affirming a woman's right to receive a widow's pension, despite challenges surrounding the registration of her marriage. The case involves a woman who married in Morocco in 1965 to a man who later acquired Spanish nationality, yet their marriage was never registered in the Spanish Civil Registry. This ruling came after the Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (INSS) denied her pension claim, citing the absence of this registration as a primary reason.
In October 2020, the INSS rejected the woman's application for the widow's pension, arguing that she did not meet the necessary requirements, specifically the registration of her marriage within the Spanish Civil Registry. In her appeal, the woman explained that she was unable to register the marriage because obtaining the required birth certificate of her husband, who was born in 1938 and registered in the 'cheran books of the Civil Registry of the Sahara,' was impossible as many of these documents had been lost.
Recently, the Social Chamber of the TSJC sided with the woman, overturning the INSS's decision. The court stated that the INSS could not consider the registration in the Spanish Civil Registry as the sole pathway to qualify for the widow's pension. The ruling emphasized that the legal validity of the marriage, which took place abroad, had never been contested and that sufficient evidence had been provided to prove the marriage's existence. The TSJC referenced the doctrines established by the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court, asserting that the lack of registration should not disadvantage the beneficiary.
Jaqui Gaspar, the lawyer representing the Col·lectiu Ronda who handled the appeal, highlighted the broader legal implications of this decision. She criticized the administration's tendency to impose unnecessary requirements under the guise of preventing fraud, arguing that the absence of a registration should not serve as a presumption against those seeking legitimate benefits. This ruling sets a precedent for recognizing the rights of individuals in similar situations, aiming to protect the integrity of social security benefits from unjust barriers.
As reported by eldebate.com.
