header-logo header-logo

Asbestos illness payments rise

05 March 2010
Issue: 7407 / Categories: Legal News , Health & safety , Damages
printer mail-detail

Extra financial help for sufferers of mesothelioma and plural plaques
Mesothelioma sufferers are to be given an extra 40% of financial help, the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) has announced.

From April, lump sum payments made under the 2008 Mesothelioma Scheme will increase to the same level as those paid under the Pneumoconiosis etc (Workers’ Compensation) Act 1979. This means individuals who develop the disease from asbestos exposure outside the workplace will receive the same payment as those exposed at work. 

Sufferers currently receive a minimum payment of £8,197 from the Mesothelioma Scheme. This will rise to £11,678 in April. The maximum payment will rise from £52,772 to £75,176.

Families of sufferers will be given an increase of up to £5,000. The government will increase payment levels under the 1979 Act by a further 1.5%. About 6,000 claimants with pleural plaques who began claims before a House of Lords ruling on 17 October 2007 will be given one-off payments of £5,000. The Law Lords held that the existence of pleural plaques did not constitute actionable or compensatable damage. Previously, the courts had regarded plaques as compensatable.

Trade union law firm Thompsons Solicitors welcomed the DWP decision on mesothelioma but expressed disappointment at the decision not to restore compensation for people with pleural plaques.

Ian McFall, head of asbestos policy at Thompsons Solicitors said: “On behalf of our clients we are disappointed the government has decided not to overturn the House of Lords’ judgment although we recognise that at least some people with pleural plaques will get something.”

The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers welcomed the increased payments for mesothelioma sufferers and their dependants, but said the decision on pleural plaques was “a disappointing end to a long, drawn out consultation process”. Mesothelioma is a fatal cancer of the lining of the lungs or abdomen associated with exposure to asbestos.

Issue: 7407 / Categories: Legal News , Health & safety , Damages
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll