The Court has ruled that sufferers of mesothelioma, a fatal tumour of the lining of the lung caused by exposure to asbestos, can continue to receive compensation from the insurer who provided cover at the time the deadly asbestos dust was inhaled by the sufferer.

The insurers had argued that only the insurer that provided cover at the time the disease developed should pay compensation.

As it often takes some 40 years after exposure for the disease to develop most companies will have gone out of business and as a result there will have been no insurer at the time the disease starts to develop.

The trial lasted 9 weeks and ended on 31^st July.  During the trial the court had to consider very complex legal, medical and insurance arguments and heard evidence from leading experts in the field of medicine and insurance law.

This decision had wide reaching implications and could have spelt a disaster for the thousand of sufferers of mesothelioma and those who are yet to develop the disease.

John Green, a specialist solicitor from WE Solicitors says, "The insurers are claiming that this is going to cost them millions when in fact traditionally the insurer at the time the dust was inhaled paid the compensation, it is not going to cost them anymore than it has done for many years.'

He adds "This is just the latest round in an attempt by the insurers to escape their liabilities to asbestos victims to the advantage of their shareholders.  A battle which has already seen suffers of another asbestos related condition, pleural plaques, being denied compensation through the courts. 

For more information, log on to www.asbestosvictimsadvice.com

WE Solicitors LLP is a specialist legal practice that has represented many victims of asbestos related diseases as well as many other diseases caused in the workplace.

If you need advice about an asbestos related disease, contact us now for information about making a claim for compensation.

This paper considers and seeks views on the government response to the House of Lords decision in Johnston v NEI International Combustion Ltd and conjoined cases (known at earlier stages as Rothwell v Chemical & Insulating Co Ltd) about pleural plaques. Pleural plaques are small localised areas of fibrosis found within the pleura of the lung caused by asbestos exposure. In a unanimous decision on 17 October 2007, the Law Lords upheld a Court of Appeal decision that the presence of pleural plaques does not constitute actionable or compensatable damage.

Click here to read the Consultation Paper.

The closing date for responses to the consultation is 1st October 2008.

We Solicitors will be publishing its response soon. 

Read the full article by downloading the PDF here.

By David Wingate
we solicitors

Dear Mr Heyes,

RE: Asbestos Related Illnesses/Pleural Plaques

I am writing to you in respect of the recent House of Lords decision concerning a condition known as pleural plaques.

Pleural plaques is a condition caused by exposure to asbestos resulting in the scarring of lungs. Whilst there are no outward symptoms those with pleural plaques are at significant risk of going on to develop more serious asbestos related conditions such as mesothelioma.

The House of Lords recently handed down a decision that persons suffering from pleural plaques were not entitled to compensation in a case commonly referred to as the Rothwell case. Basically the Lords decided that in effect there was no injury. Previously court awards have been made on the basis that there is scarring to the lungs and for the associated anxiety that a sufferer may go onto to develop a fatal asbestos related illness.

The fall out from this decision was seen recently in the Oldham Advertiser with the following article:-

http://www.oldhamadvertiser.co.uk/news/s/1025244_granddad_denied_aid_after_asbestos_exposure_at_work

The Scottish Parliament is now taking steps to reverse this decision via the legislative process:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7118805.stm

I believe that steps must be taken by Parliament to follow suit and that the victims of this condition be given the compensation they deserve. They are innocent victims with a condition that causes them great concern and distress.

I would be grateful if you would consider taking this matter further and would welcome the opportunity to discuss this letter further.

Yours sincerely,

David Wingate
david.wingate@wesolicitors.com

The woman, who never personally worked with the potentially lethal substance, was exposed as a result of close daily contact with her late father, who also sadly died from a similar illness.

Her father was a civilian employee at the Ministry of Defence Devenport Dock, where he came into contact with the substance every day. As a result, when her returned from work each night, she would inhale the asbestos fibres, which covered his overalls and hair due his work as a lagger at the dock.

It was accepted by the MoD that when she hugged her dad, she was exposed to the substance and was not exposed to asbestos in any other circumstances

Indeed, recent experience has shown an increasing public awareness in asbestos claims generally and, in particular, where the claims where the victims did not even work with the deadly substance, e.g., washing a relative's overalls and even office workers who have worked within hundreds of yards where asbestos was stored.

Indeed, even exposure by residents to asbestos producer (such as was recently highlighted at Hebden Bridge) can cause local people to develop problems in later life.

Unfortunately, the Health & Safety Executive don't expect asbestos claims to peak until 2020 at the earliest, as a consequence of the long incubation period between exposure and symptoms.

If in doubt, don't hesitate to contact your family doctor.

An NHS trial across Britain of 35,000 people aged 55-74 found routine hearing tests offered "substantial benefits" and were good value for money.

A national programme could be in place within five years, said government adviser Professor Adrian Davis, who led the research.

More than one in 10 people in the trial were found to have a moderate to severe hearing problem.

A simple 30-second test using a device which produced tones at different sound levels was enough to identify those who need a hearing aid, the trial carried out in England, Scotland and Wales found.

The Department of Health said it would look at the evidence.

Hearing aid services are currently struggling to cope with demand as patients switch from old analogue models to digital aids.

But Professor Davis, who is director of the Medical Research Council Hearing and Communication Group, said the goal was to hit 18-week waiting times for everyone by the end of 2008.

"Once we have the capacity, a screening programme is the next step," he said.

"For the first time we have come up with a really clear-cut picture that screening is incredibly effective and cost effective."

He said identifying people early was vital for quality of life.

"We know that on average people live for 10-15 years with hearing difficulties before they present to their doctor," he added.

Communication barrier

Hearing problems can make it difficult to understand conversations when there is background noise, such as in shops or cafes or when watching television.

It can lead people to become depressed and withdrawn as well as have difficulties at work.

Only 3% of people in the study were found to have hearing aids but 12% of people had moderate or severe hearing loss.

The researchers estimated a screening programme, which would most likely be done in general practice, would cost £13 per person or £100 per person if the cost of treatment is taken into account.

"We were really gob smacked that a simple test was the best strategy because there's all sorts of available technology," said Professor Davis, who is also director of the NHS newborn hearing screening programme.

"It meets the criteria for a screening programme really well."

Emma Harrison, from the deaf and hard of hearing charity RNID, said the average age for a first hearing test is over 70 - but 60% of people already have a significant hearing loss by that age.

"Widespread screening could improve the quality of life for millions of people over 55 whose hearing loss might otherwise go undetected for years, as it is easier to adjust to the benefits of a digital hearing aid if you have only recently started to lose your hearing."

But she stressed the current long waiting times for hearing specialists needed to be addressed so people could benefit from hearing aids.

A spokesperson for the Department of Health said the National Screening Committee was responsible for looking at the evidence and advising ministers.

"The current NSC advice is that there is insufficient evidence to recommend screening for hearing impairments in adults.

"However, NSC advice is regularly reviewed in the light of new research evidence becoming available."

By Emma Wilkinson
BBC News health reporter

Victims can no longer receive compensation payments (which have been ‘on hold' since 2004, in cases where the only asbestos related condition in non-disabling pleural plaques.

This decision has caused dismay and anger amongst victims, their families and representatives.

However, the decision does NOT affect victims who suffer from other asbestos related conditions such as pleural thickening; asbestosis; asbestos related lung cancer and mesothelioma.