This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/int/news/-/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-15264262

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Supreme Court to rule on pleural plaques compensation Supreme Court Court backs asbestos compensation law
(about 6 hours later)
The UK Supreme Court is due to deliver its ruling on the right of Scots to claim compensation for an asbestos-related condition. Insurance companies have failed in a legal bid to scrap the right of people in Scotland to claim damages for an asbestos-related condition.
A Scottish Parliament law allows compensation claims to be made for the condition known as pleural plaques. The UK Supreme Court dismissed their case, upholding the right of people with pleural plaques to claim compensation.
But the House of Lords ruled against such a move for the rest of the UK. Insurers earlier lost a bid to overturn the laws at the Court of Session.
Earlier this year insurance companies lost a legal bid to overturn the Scottish act at the Court of Session but appealed to the UK Supreme Court. Most Scots affected by pleural plaques previously worked in heavy industry, such as shipbuilding.
Pleural plaques are not themselves a disease and have no symptoms. Pleural plaques are not themselves a disease and have no symptoms, but the thickening of lung membranes is an indicator of past exposure to asbestos.
But the thickening of lung membranes are an indicator of past exposure to asbestos. This is a highly significant judgement.
The UK Supreme Court has said the judgement of the Scottish Parliament as an elected body about what constituted the public interest, should be respected.
Although pleural plaques are not in themselves a disease, and have no symptoms, they indicate previous exposure to asbestos.
Victims say it causes them great distress and concern they may develop a more serious condition.
Insurance companies say they should not have to pay compensation for something which has not, and may not, happen.
Because of this, the House of Lords ruled five years ago that victims could not claim compensation.Because of this, the House of Lords ruled five years ago that victims could not claim compensation.
However, the Scottish government disagreed and passed the Damages (Asbestos-related Conditions)(Scotland) Act in 2009.However, the Scottish government disagreed and passed the Damages (Asbestos-related Conditions)(Scotland) Act in 2009.
Legal interference Ministers argued pleural plaques could give rise to more serious conditions, like lung cancer, mesothelioma or asbestosis.
It allows claims to be made with the likely cost estimated at between £7m and £9m.It allows claims to be made with the likely cost estimated at between £7m and £9m.
Insurance firms have vigorously attacked the legislation, alleging it infringes against human rights laws. But insurance firms have vigorously attacked the legislation, alleging it infringes against human rights laws.
The industry argued that it breaks European Convention on Human Rights provisions on property rights and constitutes unreasonable legal interference. The industry argued that it broke European Convention on Human Rights provisions on property rights and constitutes unreasonable legal interference.
The UK Supreme Court is expected to deliver its judgement later. But Supreme Court justices in London dismissed an appeal by several insurance companies - including AXA - against an April decision by Court of Session judges in Scotland, who rejected argument that the legislation was unlawful.
If it rules against the Scottish legislation, it would be the latest in a series of decisions which ministers have seen as undermining the autonomy of Scots law. The Supreme Court ruled that it could not be said that the, "judgment of the Scottish Parliament was without reasonable foundation".