HR Future: Legal Highlights | Angola

HR Future: Legal Highlights | Angola

1st Quarter 2026

 

HR Future: Legal Highlights | Angola - 2nd Quarter 2026

 

Through this newsletter, VdA and PRIME Advogados share, on a quarterly basis, relevant information on Labour Law in Angola.

In this edition, we highlight the most relevant legislative novelty published during the second quarter of the year and present a judicial process that culminated in the notification of the Supreme Court's conformation judgment last April.

In partnership with

Contacts

Legislative Updates

Presidential Decree No. 95/26

Establishes the Legal Framework for Family Benefits under Mandatory Social Protection.

The decree came into force on 22 May 2026, revoking Presidential Decree No. 8/11 of 7 January, with the exception of the provisions relating to the funeral allowance (Articles 29 to 31 and 35), which remain in force until specific legislation is published, with the value of the respective allowance updated to AOA 100,000.00.

We highlight the main changes introduced in respect of each of the benefits covered by the decree:

 

1. Maternity

  • Certification: pre-maternity leave must be certified by a medical expert from the disability assessment and verification system, in accordance with the regulations of the relevant service.
  • Guarantee period: 12 months with a record of contributions (consecutive or non-consecutive) within the last 36 months.
  • Amount: three times the average of the last 12 declared remunerations prior to the commencement of leave, excluding holiday pay, Christmas allowances and other irregular payments. During pre-maternity leave, the allowance is equivalent to 60% of the maternity allowance.
  • Payment:
    • Employees: payment is made by the employer, by bank transfer to the insured person's account, within a maximum of 30 days from the commencement of leave. The employer is entitled to reimbursement from the Mandatory Social Protection Management Entity, upon submission of an electronic application accompanied by documentation evidencing the birth, proof of payment of the allowance and a copy of the bank transfer confirmation.
    • Self-employed or unemployed persons: payment is made directly by the Mandatory Social Protection Management Entity.
  • Replacement by the father: in the event of the mother's incapacity or death, the father may take her place, with the allowance continuing to be paid by the mother's employer.
  • Special circumstances:
    • In the event of miscarriage, stillbirth or death of the newborn, the allowance is equivalent to one month.
    • If the child dies before the end of the leave period, entitlement to the allowance ceases on the day the employee returns to work; however, payment is made in full for that month.

 

2. Breastfeeding Allowance

  • Guarantee period: three months with a record of contributions (consecutive or non-consecutive) within the last 12 months.
  • Amount (per child):
    • AOA 6,000.00 – insured persons with remuneration of up to five national minimum wages;
    • AOA 4,000.00 – insured persons with remuneration above five and below 10 national minimum wages;
    • AOA 2,000.00 – insured persons with remuneration above 10 national minimum wages.
  • Payment: of the responsibility of the Mandatory Social Protection Management Entity, following the submission of an electronic application by the insured persons or by the employer at their request, accompanied by the birth certificate and documentation evidencing compliance with the vaccination schedule. The allowance is paid in three annual instalments, each equivalent to the amount for 12 months. Failure to comply with the vaccination schedule results in the suspension of the allowance.

 

3. Family Allowance

  • Duration: granted from the 37th month of the child's life until the child reaches 216 months (i.e. 18 years of age), with a limit of five children.
  • Conditions: entitlement is subject to the submission of the birth certificate, the registration of the child as a dependant with the Mandatory Social Protection Management Entity, proof of compliance with the vaccination schedule and evidence of attendance at an educational establishment with satisfactory performance in subsequent years (in the case of a dependant of school age) or proof of disability (in the case of a dependant with a disability). Proof of compliance with the vaccination plan and satisfactory school performance must be provided annually.
  • Minimum amount (per dependant):
    • AOA 2,400.00 – insured persons and pensioners with remuneration/pension of up to five national minimum wages;
    • AOA 1,500.00 – insured persons and pensioners with remuneration/pension between five and 10 national minimum wages;
    • AOA 900.00 – insured persons and pensioners with remuneration/pension above 10 national minimum wages.
  • Payment: payment is the responsibility of employers (for active insured persons, with due reference on the monthly pay slip) and of the Mandatory Social Protection Management Entity (for pensioners) and is due from the month following the submission of the electronic application. If both parents are employees, the allowance is paid by the respective employers on a shared basis. In the event of the death of the insured person or pensioner, the allowance is paid by the Mandatory Social Protection Management Entity together with the survivor's pension.

Relevant Case Law

Judgment of the Labour Chamber of the Supreme Court of 18 December 2025

Conformity of the Supreme Court decision with the ruling issued by the Constitutional Court on 6 December 2024 (Case No. 941/2024)

The judgment in question was delivered in the context of a dispute concerning a disciplinary dismissal.

Following his dismissal, the employee brought an action before the Labour Division of the then Provincial Court of Luanda, and the action was dismissed, with the employer being acquitted.

On appeal, the Higher Court overturned the decision of the court below and declared the dismissal null and void. However, despite having declared the nullity of the dismissal, it decided to apply to the case the consequences provided for an unfounded dismissal, basing its decision on settled case law of that court, according to which, where a lengthy period of time has elapsed between the dismissal and the judgment (in the present case, approximately 9 years), it would be more sensible and fair to apply the regime applicable to unfounded dismissal.

Indeed, in the case of a null dismissal, reinstatement of the employee is mandatory, there being no option to choose between reinstatement and compensation, whereas in the case of an unfounded dismissal the employer has the option of compensating the employee as an alternative to reinstatement.

Furthermore, in cases of nullity, not only the base salary but also the supplements forming part of the employee's remuneration are claimable, whereas in unfounded dismissal cases only the base salary is claimable, subject to a cap dependent on the employee's length of service.

Dissatisfied, the Appellant lodged an Extraordinary Appeal on Grounds of Unconstitutionality before the Constitutional Court, which upheld the appeal and declared the appealed judgment unconstitutional, on the grounds that the Supreme Court's decision violated the constitutional principles of fair trial and of favour laboratoris. The Constitutional Court recalled that the latter principle requires that, where several possible interpretive approaches exist, the one most favourable to the interests of employees must be chosen, and that the former requires the parties to proceedings receive impartial, equitable treatment consistent with established law at all stages of the proceedings.

According to the Constitutional Court, deriving from a mandatory provision consequences other than those legally prescribed distorts the purpose of the rules and undermines legal certainty and security.

This decision reaffirms that the legal classification of a dismissal as null requires the full application of the corresponding legal regime, and courts may not substitute it with the regime applicable to unfounded dismissal.

Interested in this article?