header-logo header-logo

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

Asbestos claim uncertainty

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.

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

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Commercial firm strengthens real estate disputes team with associate hire

Switalskis—three appointments

Switalskis—three appointments

Firm appoints three directors to board

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Six promoted to partner and one to legal director across UK and Ireland offices

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll