Insurers lose asbestos case

INSURERS face paying out millions of pounds after they failed in a legal bid yesterday to stop paying compensation to workers who developed a lung condition after they were exposed to asbestos.

But a High Court judge in England cut the amount of compensation claimants receive for developing pleural plaques, a benign scarring of the lung lining, by around half after the test case which could affect thousands of other claims.

Mr Justice Holland, sitting in Newcastle, gave his judgment at the end of a hearing held in Manchester and London. The defendants, who included Norwich Union and British Shipbuilders, challenged payment of compensation to people who suffer pleural plaques, which has been standard since three High Court rulings in the mid-1980s. They argued the condition was not severe enough to have an impact on the body, and that if pay-outs were made, they should be limited.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The ten claimants were all men aged 56-68 from a cross-section of jobs such as boiler-making and shipbuilding, who said their employers were negligent in not protecting them from the fibres.

They argued that pleural plaques were an indication of exposure to asbestos and therefore they were faced with developing more serious illnesses such as pleural thickening, asbestosis, lung cancer or mesothelioma.

One of them said the judgment was "satisfying" as the insurance firms had tried to "wriggle out" of paying.

John Grieves, 64, of Gravesend, Kent, who only found he had developed pleural plaques in 2000 despite working as a maintenance fitter in the 1960s, said: "People wouldn’t believe the conditions we worked in." He was also concerned about his wife and daughter’s health as he may have brought home fibres on his work clothes.

The judge said: "I bow to no-one in my compassion for those who contract an asbestos-related disease, particularly mesothelioma - indeed, vivid to my memory is the terminal suffering of a personal friend who contracted this condition."

Seven of the ten wanted an initial payment, then further compensation should they develop a more serious condition, while three claimants wanted a lump sum.

Solicitor Andrew Venn said those who chose a full and final payment would receive between 6,500 and 7,000 after judgment. Those opting for a provisional payment would get 3,500-4,000. Traditionally, claimants had received up to 15,000 for a final settlement, and up to 7,000 for a provisional payment, though cases differed.