header-logo header-logo

10 December 2009 / Rehana Azib
Issue: 7397 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Asbestos exposure

Rehana Azib explains why 2009 has been a bad year for defendants

There has been a flurry of recent asbestos exposure related cases providing largely good news for claimants in the context of the burden of proving causation and risk.

In Diane Willmore v Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council [2009] EWCA Civ 1211, [2009] All ER (D) 209 (Nov) the Court of Appeal was asked to address the questions of the burden of proof a claimant must surmount in order to establish material or substantial contribution to the risk of harm. It was held that there was no such thing as a safe dose of asbestos and therefore it was insufficient to eliminate one source of exposure to asbestos if another remained.

The circumstances of asbestos exposure in this case are unusual in that they do not involve exposure in the course of employment. The claimant was a former pupil of the defendant local authority school. There were three circumstances in which the trial judge had found that the claimant had been exposed to a risk

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll