Medical Leave in Spain 2026: Travel, Social Media and Detectives

If you are on medical leave and do not know how far you can move around, post on social media, or go about everyday life without putting yourself at risk, you can speak with Fernanda Vargas on WhatsApp or book a consultation on Calendly.

Medical leave in Spain 2026: being on leave does not mean being shut up at home

Medical leave does not, by itself, require you to remain at home all day. The key idea is different: during temporary incapacity, the employee must avoid conduct that is incompatible with their medical condition, that harms or delays recovery, or that prevents them from complying with medical monitoring obligations.

That is why going out for a walk, running errands, traveling, or posting content on social media is not automatically unlawful and does not in itself amount to fraud. What matters is the context: what injury or medical condition exists, what medical limitations it entails, what activity was carried out, and whether that activity could worsen the condition or seriously contradict the situation of incapacity.

It is also worth separating two different risks. One is losing or having the temporary incapacity benefit suspended by the Social Security (Seguridad Social). The other, different one, is employment-related: the company may try to impose a disciplinary sanction or dismiss the employee alleging a breach of contractual good faith. In both areas, the courts have been requiring more than suspicions or impressions: there must be evidence.

What the law says: art. 175 LGSS (loss or suspension of the benefit) and art. 54.2.d ET (contractual good faith)

The General Social Security Law (Ley General de la Seguridad Social, LGSS) sets out specific situations in which the temporary incapacity benefit may be affected. It may be denied, revoked, or suspended when the beneficiary acts fraudulently to obtain or keep the benefit, or when they work as an employee or self-employed.

In addition, the law allows suspension when, without reasonable cause, treatment is refused or abandoned. And it adds a rule that is very important in practice: failure to attend appointments with INSS doctors or mutual insurance companies [mutuas] may lead to the precautionary suspension of the entitlement while it is checked whether the absence was justified.

From the employment-law perspective, the Workers’ Statute (Estatuto de los Trabajadores, ET) treats a breach of contractual good faith as grounds for disciplinary dismissal. However, not every questionable act during medical leave automatically falls within that ground. The courts require seriousness and fault. In other words, the company cannot rely only on appearances: it must prove sufficiently serious and relevant facts.

This explains why the same conduct can lead to different outcomes depending on the case. An everyday activity that is compatible with an injury is not the same as working in another business while on leave, refusing treatment without cause, or carrying out acts that are physically incompatible with the medical condition recorded in the medical certificates.

The key test used by the courts: compatibility with the condition and not harming recovery

The central test that is repeated in this area is clear: activity carried out during medical leave will generally be sanctionable only if it is incompatible with the medical condition or if it harms or delays recovery. It is not enough for the company to think that it “does not look right” or that, socially, it is striking to see a person on medical leave outside the home.

This has several practical consequences. The first is that the analysis always depends on the diagnosis and the actual functional limitations. An activity that may be irrelevant for anxiety or neck pain may be problematic for a different injury. The second is that the burden of proving the facts and their relevance cannot be based on mere speculation.

That is why, in a dispute over medical leave, aspects such as these are usually decisive:

• what medical condition is stated in the sick leave certificate;
• what specific activity the employee carried out;
• when they carried it out;
• whether that activity was compatible with recovery;
• whether there was any failure to comply with medical appointments or treatment;
• and whether the company obtained the evidence lawfully.

When in doubt, the cautious approach is simple: before doing an activity that could be misinterpreted, it is advisable to assess whether it fits your medical condition and whether you could explain it naturally before the mutua, the INSS, or a court.

Can I travel while on medical leave? Within Spain, to the EU, and outside the EU

There is no rule that prohibits travel merely because you are on medical leave. The problem is not the trip itself, but its effects. The trip must not be incompatible with the medical condition, must not delay recovery, and must not prevent attendance at medical monitoring appointments.

Within Spain, the test remains the same. A short trip, a family trip, or a temporary stay may pose no problem if they are compatible with your state of health and you can remain reachable for checkups and monitoring. By contrast, if the trip makes treatment more difficult, prevents you from attending an appointment, or involves activity that is physically inadvisable, the risks increase significantly.

If the trip is to another EU country, the EEA, Switzerland, or the United Kingdom, the main issue remains a medical and monitoring one. In addition, when the sick leave is issued in those countries, it has been reported that the certificate does not require legalization. Even so, if you are going to be outside Spain during a period of temporary incapacity, it is prudent to check in advance how to report any issue and how to deal with possible appointments.

Outside the EU, the situation may become more complicated. When it involves countries without an agreement covering temporary incapacity, legalization or an apostille and translation of the documentation is usually required, as well as sending it to the INSS within 10 days. Precisely because of that complexity, before traveling it is advisable to confirm your specific situation and the documents required.

In practice, before traveling while on medical leave, it is advisable to ask yourself these questions:

• Is the trip compatible with my medical condition?
• Will I be able to follow the prescribed treatment and rest?
• Will I be able to attend an appointment with the mutua or the INSS if I am summoned?
• Can I justify where I am and why the trip does not harm my recovery?

If the answer to any of these questions is doubtful, it is advisable to proceed very cautiously. A poorly planned trip may end up being used as an argument against the employee, even though traveling in itself is not prohibited.

Appointments with the mutua and the INSS: what happens if they cannot reach you (precautionary suspension and 10 days to justify)

One of the most serious mistakes during medical leave is neglecting medical summons. The rules on the management and monitoring of temporary incapacity establish that the appointment must be notified at least 4 business days in advance.

If the person does not attend, the benefit is suspended from the day after the failure to attend. That suspension is precautionary: it serves to determine whether the absence was justified. After that, the person has 10 business days to justify it.

If the justification is accepted, the suspension should not become final. But if the absence is not justified within that period, the entitlement to the benefit is terminated. That is why it is so important to keep contact details up to date, check notifications, and be able to prove any reasonable cause that prevented attendance.

This is directly linked to travel and being away from home. Not being at your usual address is not, by itself, fraud. But if that trip means you do not receive the notice or cannot attend the appointment, the issue stops being the trip and becomes the failure to attend.

As a practical guideline, always keep anything that may help justify an absence: reports, medical notes, transport disruptions, or any document explaining why you could not attend. In these cases, deadlines matter a great deal.

Social media during medical leave: what the High Court of Justice of Galicia said (judgment 3066/2026)

Social media is one of the most frequent sources of conflict during medical leave. Many people think that seeing someone dancing, traveling, or smiling in a video is enough to conclude that the leave is false. But that is not how the courts work.

Judgment 3066/2026 of the High Court of Justice of Galicia is a good example. It confirmed the unfair dismissal of a cook who was on medical leave for neck pain after a traffic accident and who was dismissed for posting TikTok videos of himself dancing. The court considered it decisive that the company had not proved the date of the recordings or that the activity had harmed his recovery.

In addition, the court rejected the claim that the dismissal was null and void because the mere existence of medical leave was not enough, by itself, to prove discrimination. At first instance, reinstatement or compensation of 5,126 euros had been ordered.

The practical lesson is very important. A video or a photo can become evidence, but not every post proves fraud. For social media to carry real weight, the company must be able to connect that post with relevant facts: when it was recorded, what activity it shows, and why that would be incompatible with the specific medical condition.

That is why, if you are on medical leave, the most sensible course is to act as if any post could end up in disciplinary proceedings or in court. Not because everything is prohibited, but because out of context an image can be misinterpreted. And if you are an employer, you should not rush either: a striking screenshot does not replace full evidence.

Private detectives: when their report is valid evidence and when it is not (High Court of Justice of Catalonia 3970/2025 and High Court of Justice of Castile and León)

Private detective reports may appear in medical leave litigation, but not everything goes. Their usefulness depends both on the content and on the way the information was obtained.

Judgment 3970/2025 of the High Court of Justice of Catalonia declared detective evidence unlawful in a particularly clear case: the detective himself provoked the conduct by arranging a manicure appointment with the employee, who was on medical leave. The court recalled that this evidence must comply with the tests of suitability, necessity, and proportionality, and that it cannot induce the infringement.

That limit is essential. A detective may observe and document facts, but may not create the situation that he then seeks to present as misconduct. If the evidence arises from that provocation, its value may collapse entirely.

The case decided by the High Court of Justice of Castile and León involving an employee on medical leave for anxiety whom a detective saw going to the hair salon and shopping is also very illustrative. The court held that the mere observation of everyday activities did not prove fraud. In that context, the dismissal was declared null and void, with reinstatement, back pay, and compensation of 7,500 euros, within a framework found to amount to retaliation.

In addition, Law 15/2022 reinforces protection against discriminatory decisions based on illness or health condition. The law prohibits that discrimination, declares discriminatory acts null and void, provides for a reversal of the burden of proof, and presumes the existence of non-material damages.

Translated into practice: a detective report does not automatically make a dismissal fair. If the observed activity is normal, everyday, or compatible with the medical condition, or if the evidence was obtained disproportionately or by provoking the conduct, the company may lose the case and may even face a declaration that the dismissal is null and void if there are indications of discrimination or retaliation.

Working or helping in another business while on medical leave: the riskiest situation

If there is one particularly sensitive kind of conduct during temporary incapacity, it is working as an employee or self-employed. The General Social Security Law itself includes this as grounds for denying, revoking, or suspending the benefit.

From the benefit perspective, this is the highest-risk scenario. And from the employment perspective, it can also form the basis of disciplinary dismissal for breach of contractual good faith, provided that the company sufficiently proves the facts and their seriousness.

Here, it is important not to think only of a formal second job. Problems may also arise if you actually help in a family business, attend to customers, provide services, carry out paid tasks, or engage in an activity that, because of its intensity or characteristics, contradicts the situation of incapacity.

That does not mean that any isolated or minimal act will automatically lead to loss of the benefit or to a fair dismissal. But it does mean that this is the area where it is easiest for the company and the managing entity to argue that there was fraud or serious misconduct.

If you have doubts about a specific form of collaboration, the most prudent course is not to improvise. In matters of employment law, Fernanda Vargas, employment lawyer in Madrid, can review the real risk with you before an apparently minor act ends up affecting the benefit or your job.

If you are dismissed: null and void, unfair, or fair, and the 20-business-day deadline

A dismissal during medical leave is not automatically null and void, but neither is it automatically valid. The outcome depends on what the company proves and on the real reason for the decision.

A dismissal may be fair if the company proves serious and culpable facts that fall within breach of contractual good faith, for example when it shows conduct that is genuinely incompatible with medical leave or a situation of working during temporary incapacity.

It may be declared unfair when the company does not properly prove the facts, does not show incompatibility with the medical condition, does not prove the date or context of what it alleges, or when the sanction does not withstand judicial scrutiny. That is what happened in the judgment of the High Court of Justice of Galicia regarding the TikTok videos.

And it may be declared null and void when the dismissal has a discriminatory or retaliatory component. Law 15/2022 protects against discrimination based on illness or health condition, and provides for nullity, non-material damages, and a reversal of the burden of proof. The Castile and León case shows that, when there is no real evidence of fraud and the context points to retaliation, the consequence may be reinstatement with back pay and additional compensation.

There is also a very short deadline to act: a dismissal challenge must be filed within 20 business days. These are not calendar days, but even so the time passes very quickly. If you let that deadline pass, you may lose the possibility of challenging the dismissal in court.

If you are given a dismissal letter while on medical leave, do not assume that the company is right or that the dismissal will necessarily be null and void. What matters is to review immediately the letter, the evidence, your medical situation, and the full context.

Recommendations for companies and HR teams

For companies, disputes over medical leave often create a great deal of internal tension. Precisely for that reason, it is advisable to act methodically and not on intuition.

• Do not assume fraud because the person leaves home, travels, or appears on social media.
• Before imposing a sanction, analyze whether the conduct is truly incompatible with the medical condition or whether it may harm recovery.
• Verify dates, context, and traceability of the evidence. An image without a date or without a connection to the medical condition may be useless.
• Respect the legal framework for appointments and for monitoring temporary incapacity.
• If you use detectives, be especially careful about proportionality: observing is not the same as provoking the conduct.
• Keep Law 15/2022 in mind. A rushed approach can turn a debatable dismissal into a null and void dismissal with greater financial consequences.

From the HR perspective, the best practice is usually to document matters well, avoid automatic conclusions, and assess each case with legal support before communicating a sanction or a dismissal.

Frequently Asked Questions

If you are on medical leave and are concerned about a trip, an appointment, a social media post, or a possible dismissal, you can contact Fernanda Vargas on WhatsApp or book a consultation on Calendly to review your case carefully.