Lesões marginalizadas: perspectivas acerca da aplicação indevida da classificação das sequelas nos processos de concessão de auxílio-acidente

Abstract

The benefit called accident benefit is granted to some types of insured persons under the general social security regime, when they present any sequelae resulting from an accident of any nature or from work that constitute a limitation to their work. The Superior Court of Justice and the National Class of Standardization of Federal Special Courts have a pacified understanding, in perfect harmony with the legislation on the subject, that the minimum degree of injury is sufficient to grant this benefit. However, the federal judges of Paraíba currently insist on using the classification developed by the author Weliton Barbosa Santos, for the work “Proposal for the valuation of labor repercussions in Labor Law and Civil Law”, to ask the expert to classify the injury of policyholders in one of the ten classes foreseen by the author. Using this data, they generally only grant the benefit from injuries classified as class 4 onwards, disregarding and marginalizing injuries classified in classes 1, 2 and 3. Therefore, this study is dedicated to investigating issues related to the benefit accident benefit, in addition to verifying the jurisprudential behavior in relation to the need for some degree of work limitation to grant the benefit. To this end, the constitutional principles applicable to the topic, the relevant legislation and specific cases are analyzed in order to demonstrate the practical applicability of this study. Based on this analysis, the illegality of using such a classification is verified, as it constitutes a mitigation of the rights of the insured, done in disregard of the jurisprudential understandings of the higher courts and marginalizing the injuries of the insured.