header-logo header-logo

Mesothelioma exemption lost

31 January 2014
Issue: 7593 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

PI lawyers slam government's u-turn

Personal injury lawyers have slated the government’s U-turn on mesothelioma.

The government has decided to revoke the exemption of mesothelioma claims from the success fees and after-the-event (ATE) premium elements of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO).

A Ministry of Justice consultation last year asked whether ss 44 and 46 of LASPO should be brought into force for claims for mesothelioma claims—a life-threatening lung disease caused by contact with asbestos. Ministers have now decided to remove the exemption.

Opposition MPs criticised the decision during a Commons debate on mesothelioma this week, and claimant lawyers have also expressed disapproval.  

Matthew Stockwell, president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL), says: “It’s impossible to rationalise why dying people should have to pay for the inherent risks of pursuing redress, when they certainly never asked to be in a position where they need compensation.

“Mesothelioma claimants know they are going to die, and they know they have to race against the clock when they make a claim. They are simply trying to make their last few months more bearable, and to ensure that their families will have some security when they’re gone. If ever a claimant needed full compensation, it is surely the claimant facing a death sentence just because he turned up for work."

 

Issue: 7593 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Birketts—trainee cohort

Birketts—trainee cohort

Firm welcomes new cohort of 29 trainee solicitors for 2025

Keoghs—four appointments

Keoghs—four appointments

Four partner hires expand legal expertise in Scotland and Northern Ireland

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Real estate team in Yorkshire welcomes new partner

NEWS
Robert Taylor of 360 Law Services warns in this week's NLJ that adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) risks entrenching disadvantage for SME law firms, unless tools are tailored to their needs
The Court of Protection has ruled in Macpherson v Sunderland City Council that capacity must be presumed unless clearly rebutted. In this week's NLJ, Sam Karim KC and Sophie Hurst of Kings Chambers dissect the judgment and set out practical guidance for advisers faced with issues relating to retrospective capacity and/or assessments without an examination
Delays and dysfunction continue to mount in the county court, as revealed in a scathing Justice Committee report and under discussion this week by NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School. Bulk claims—especially from private parking firms—are overwhelming the system, with 8,000 cases filed weekly
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve charts the turbulent progress of the Employment Rights Bill through the House of Lords, in this week's NLJ
From oligarchs to cosmetic clinics, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) target journalists, activists and ordinary citizens with intimidating legal tactics. Writing in NLJ this week, Sadie Whittam of Lancaster University explores the weaponisation of litigation to silence critics
back-to-top-scroll