When a workplace injury worsens, the 1.5 age-related bonus factor may be applied again in the review of permanent incapacity.
When the consequences of a workplace accident become more severe over time, the injured worker may request a review of their permanent partial incapacity (PPI). A frequent question arises in these cases: if the 1.5 bonus factor — applied based on age — was already considered in the initial decision, can it be applied again during the review?
The Lisbon Court of Appeal has recently clarified this matter.
What was at stake?
In a ruling dated 16 January 2026, the Lisbon Court of Appeal examined a case in which a worker had suffered a workplace accident in 2018.
Initially, a 3% PPI was recognised. Given the worker’s age, the 1.5 bonus factor was applied, resulting in a final incapacity of 4.5%.
Following a subsequent aggravation of the injuries, a review procedure determined a new base incapacity of 4.115%. Once again applying the 1.5 factor, the total PPI increased to 6.1725%.
The insurance company appealed, arguing that the bonus factor could not be applied again, as it had already been used in the initial decision. It relied on Supreme Court Uniformising Judgment No. 16/2024.
The Court’s decision
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and confirmed that:
- Article 70 of Law No. 98/2009 (Workplace Accidents Law) requires benefits to be adjusted whenever there is a modification in the worker’s earning capacity;
- The constitutional principle of fair compensation prevents recognised aggravation from resulting in a reduction of rights;
- The legal wording “not having benefited from the application of that factor” aims only to prevent a duplicated artificial increase — a true “bonus over bonus”;
- Uniformising Judgment No. 16/2024 does not apply where there is an actual clinical aggravation, but only to situations where the bonus factor was claimed again without any worsening of incapacity.
The Court further noted that a restrictive interpretation could lead to materially unfair outcomes, allowing a worsened medical condition to result in a lower recognised incapacity than previously determined.
What does this mean in practice?
This decision clarifies that:
- In cases of aggravation, the 1.5 bonus factor continues to apply to the newly assessed incapacity;
- The factor has a corrective function, reflecting increased vulnerability associated with age;
- The review mechanism exists to adjust compensation to clinical reality — not to diminish previously recognised rights.
Why is this relevant?
This clarification is particularly important for:
- Workers whose medical condition worsens after a workplace accident;
- HR departments and those managing workplace accident claims;
- Companies and insurance providers involved in incapacity reassessment procedures.
The ruling reinforces the principles of equality and effective protection of workers, ensuring that compensation evolves alongside the actual level of incapacity.
When incapacity increases, compensation must follow — the review process exists to correct, not to reduce.
Labour Department
Hugo Martins Braz | Mariana Lacueva Barradas | Catarina Almeida
