header-logo header-logo

Asbestos claim uncertainty

14 October 2010
Issue: 7437 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Confusion as appeal judges rule on mesothelioma victims’ claims

Employers, insurers and families of asbestos victims face uncertainty after a “deeply troubling” ruling on mesothelioma liability.

The Court of Appeal judgment in the EL Trigger litigation, handed down last Friday, considers which insurer should meet a mesothelioma claim resulting from historic asbestos exposure.

Confusingly, there was a lack of consensus among the three judges. According to the court, liability will depend on the wording of the policy involved. In some cases the relevant policy will be the one in force when the tumour started to develop, while for others it will be the policy in place at the time of exposure.

Both claimant and defendant lawyers have criticised the judgment.
Henry Bermingham, public sector partner at Berrymans Lace Mawer LLP, who represented defendants in the case, says that private companies, the public sector and their insurers hoped for “clarity and certainty” on who was liable to compensate victims of asbestos exposure.

“However, in the extraordinary judgment which spanned more than 160 pages, the waters have been muddied somewhat. The

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
In NLJ this week, Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre marks Pro Bono Week by urging lawyers to recognise the emotional toll of pro bono work
Can a lease legally last only days—or even hours? Professor Mark Pawlowski of the University of Greenwich explores the question in this week's NLJ
RFC Seraing v FIFA, in which the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) reaffirmed that awards by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) may be reviewed by EU courts on public-policy grounds, is under examination in this week's NLJ by Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law, Zurich
back-to-top-scroll