“Victims of asbestos-related disease are to be offered a process for out-of-court compensation along the lines of the RTA Portal, under proposals to support mesothelioma sufferers announced by the Ministry of Justice today.”
Law Society’s Gazette, 24th July 2013
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
“A government scheme designed to speed payments to mesothelioma sufferers could leave them thousands of pounds out of pocket and will not help other asbestos victims, according to claimant personal injury lawyers.”
Litigation Futures, 9th May 2013
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
“A new law intended to ensure insurance firms pay compensation when employers’ paperwork is lost will apply only to some cancer sufferers, and they will get less than expected.”
The Independent, 5th May 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“A scheme to compensate victims of asbestos cancer will not come into force for two years, so many will die before receiving any money, the government is being warned.”
The Guardian, 19th August 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Back to the problem of when and where you can sue various members of a group of companies. In the Cape case (for which see my post), a parent company was held liable for failing to ensure that its subsidiary properly managed the risks posed by asbestos. In this case of Vava, the claimants wanted to sue a South African registered holding company (AASA) in the UK, on the basis that the real decisions were taken in the UK, and hence AASA were domiciled in the UK for purposes of suing them.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 16th June 2012
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
Domestic and Personal Injury Newsletter (PDF)
Thirty Nine Essex Street, June 2012
Source: www.39essex.com
“Regulating nanotechnology is fraught with difficulties. Current environmental law simply doesn’t apply on the nano-scale.”
The Guardian, 11th June 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“This may sound like a rather dreary topic, but the problem is vitally important for the proper reach of environmental and personal injury law. Some may have seen from my post on the Erika disaster the difficult issues which can arise when a multi–national (in that case, Total) does business through a number of corporate entities, particularly where they are domiciled in different countries. But the present case is a good example where liabilities are not confined to the party directly responsible for the injury or disaster. Good thing, too, for this claimant, who stood to gain nothing from his former employer, a company now dissolved, or indeed its insurers.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 4th May 2012
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“Sufferers of asbestos-related cancer will initially be exempt from government changes to ‘no-win, no-fee’ rules, a justice minister has said.”
BBC News, 24th April 2012
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“The Supreme Court handed down judgment in the Employers’ Liability Policy Trigger Litigation on 28 March 2012. The appeals of the run-off insurers on the construction of ‘disease contracted’ were dismissed and the appeals of the insureds and Zurich against the construction of ‘sustaining injury’ were allowed. The result is that employers’ liability policies which are written on a ‘sustained’ or ‘contracted’ basis will, in mesothelioma cases, respond by reference to the date of exposure rather than the date of the tumour. The Court was divided on a subsidiary question of causation as to the application of the ‘special rule’ in Fairchild. Lord Phillips would have held that none of the policies responded but the majority was firmly against his view.”
Full story (PDF)
4 New Square, 28th March 2012
Source: www.4newsquare.com
“Insurers may have to pay out as much as £5bn to relatives of those who have died from asbestos-related cancers following a supreme court judgment that will benefit thousands of families.”
The Guardian, 28th March 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The UK Supreme Court has made a ruling which could allow thousands of insurance claims by families of people who died after exposure to asbestos.”
BBC News, 28th March 2012
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Thousands of families whose relatives were killed by asbestos cancers will win a landmark compensation victory this week, sources have told The Independent on Sunday. The Supreme Court will rule on Wednesday that insurers who offered cover at the time victims inhaled the deadly fibres will have to pay compensation.”
The Independent, 25th March 2012
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“Peers in the House of Lords have voted for sufferers of asbestos-related disease to be exempt from reforms to no win, no fee litigation.”
Law Society’s Gazette, 15th March 2012
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
“A company in Carmarthenshire has been fined £25,000 after being found guilty of failing to protect its employees from asbestos.”
BBC News, 2nd March 2012
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Elderly victims of mesothelioma could be entitled to substantial compensation, following a landmark ruling on damages for pain and suffering.”
Law Society’s Gazette, 13th February 2012
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
“The UK Supreme Court has backed the right of people in Scotland to claim damages for the asbestos-related condition pleural plaques.”
BBC News, 12th October 2011
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“A health board is unlikely to face prosecution over whether up to 30 people were exposed to asbestos at Bronglais Hospital in Aberystwyth.”
BBC News, 12th August 2011
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“The family of a miner who died years after an experiment with asbestos coating in a pit have won compensation three years after his death.”
BBC News, 10th March 2011
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024