A key ruling from April 2026 establishes that the worker must provide evidence of excessive working hours before the company assumes the burden of proof. The ruling puts an end to years of conflicting criteria between courts and has direct implications for companies, the self-employed and workers.
What has the Supreme Court decided?
The Social Chamber of the Supreme Court, in its judgment no. 372/2026 of April 15, has clarified the consequences of the company's non-compliance with the daily working hours record provided for in article 34.9 of the Workers' Statute.
The fundamental question was clear: if a company doesn't keep the mandatory time records, does that mean it must automatically pay all the overtime claimed by the employee? The Supreme Court's answer is No, not automatically..
What changes with this ruling?
The ruling distinguishes between two different scenarios. If there is a pre-established schedule known to both parties, the employee must provide evidence that this schedule is not actually being followed. Only if they do so does the lack of a work schedule shift the burden of proof to the employer to demonstrate the actual hours worked. If, however, the work schedule is not fixed, the company must prove the hours actually worked by the employee.
In other words: the absence of a time record is no longer a "silver bullet" for the worker. Context matters.
The specific case that led to the sentence
The dispute pitted a retail worker against a self-employed business owner. The employee was claiming payment for alleged overtime hours worked over several years. The business partially acknowledged a debt of €1,000 but denied the remainder. The Supreme Court upheld the ruling of the High Court of Justice of Castilla-La Mancha: the worker had failed to provide receipts, delivery notes, electronic communications, or witnesses to substantiate the habitual extension of his workday.
Who is affected by this resolution?
For companies and self-employed employers
This ruling is relatively good news, but it does not eliminate the legal obligation to keep a record of working hours. The Supreme Court rejects the notion that the lack of a record automatically reverses the burden of proof, but maintains that, when there is sufficient evidence of non-compliance, the company must prove the hours actually worked.
Failure to keep records is still an offense, and in the event of litigation, you will remain at a disadvantage if the employee provides even minimal evidence.
For workers
If you have a fixed schedule and you feel your company isn't respecting it, the fact that they don't keep a record of your working hours isn't enough to win a lawsuit. You need to document it: messages, emails, witnesses, receipts—any evidence to support your claim.
Practical recommendations
If you are a company or self-employed with employees:
- Keep accurate and daily records of your working hours. It's mandatory and it protects you.
- Define schedules in writing and keep a record of any changes.
- When making claims for overtime, keep all the documentation you can.
If you are an employee:
- Keep evidence if you work hours outside your usual schedule: messages, emails, or any communication.
- Do not assume that the company's lack of registration guarantees your claim.
A ruling that clarifies, but does not eliminate risks
The Supreme Court has brought order to an area that generated considerable legal uncertainty. However, the best strategy for both companies and workers remains the same: comply with the law from the outset and ensure everything is properly documented.
If you have questions about how to manage working hours records in your company or want to know how this ruling affects your specific situation, Contact our consultancy in CiezaWe help you stay up-to-date and avoid work problems before they arise.
English 
Spanish