header-logo header-logo

22 March 2013 / Robert O'Leary
Issue: 7553 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Double or nothing

113477174_0

Robert O’Leary outlines what a claimant needs to prove in an occupational cancer claim in light of the Phurnacite Workers Group Litigation

The legal principles applicable to occupational cancer claims are the same as those in other personal injuries actions. The claimant must prove that the defendant owed him a duty in law, that the duty was breached, and that the breach has caused him injury, loss and damage. In such cases, however, other than those involving mesothelioma, the important question is often raised of how the burden of proof can be discharged where there are alternative potential causes of a disease.

Sienkiewicz

Before the decision of the Supreme Court in Sienkiewicz v Greif (UK) Ltd; Willmore v Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council [2011] UKSC 10, a mesothelioma claim, the test applied by the courts was whether the claimant had proved that the defendant’s breach of duty more than doubled the relative risk of the claimant contracting the disease (the “doubles the risk” test). The “doubles the risk” test had been applied

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

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

DAC Beachcroft—Kirstie Pike & Simy Khanna

DAC Beachcroft—Kirstie Pike & Simy Khanna

DAC Beachcroft further builds national Professional Liability practice, hiring two partners in Bristol

NEWS
A child’s views can be taken into account during international child abduction proceedings, the Supreme Court has held
Small and medium-sized law firms have urged regulators to pause plans to exclude owner-managers from compliance officer roles
Lawyers have raised the alarm on employment tribunal delays and backlogs, with some cases facing a three-year wait for a hearing
The controversial assisted dying Bill has drawn to a halt after MPs defeated it by 286 votes to 270
MPs have called for legislation to protect against the human rights risks of artificial intelligence (AI)
back-to-top-scroll