The Padova Court's decision recognizes a domestic accident suffered by a remote worker as a workplace injury, provoking critical discussions around worker protection in the remote working environment. This case, supported by the FGU Gilda Unams union, culminated in the requirement for the employer to cover medical expenses, highlighting the ambiguities in today's working model forced by the pandemic. Notably, while it is essential to uphold the rights of agile workers as stipulated in pre-existing laws, there are worries about dangerous assumptions surrounding employer liability. Private homes are not technically workplaces, and they cannot adhere to the same safety standards mandated for offices or factories. Consequently, categorizing all incidents occurring at home as employer responsibility disregards a fundamental reality: companies lack control over employees' home environments and cannot inspect them without consent, often relying solely on self-reporting by employees. This situation could have profound implications for how remote work is organized and regulated in Italy, potentially leading to increased liability risks for companies. The ruling may prompt businesses to rethink their remote work policies and increase focus on employee safety, balancing legal requirements with practical realities of working from home.