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/world-17535887

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Asbestos: court ruling opens way for insurance claims Asbestos: court ruling opens way for insurance claims
(40 minutes later)
The UK Supreme Court has made a ruling which could allow thousands of insurance claims by families of people who died after exposure to asbestos.The UK Supreme Court has made a ruling which could allow thousands of insurance claims by families of people who died after exposure to asbestos.
The court said insurance liability was "triggered" when an employee was exposed to asbestos fibres - not when symptoms first appeared. The court placed insurance liability at the time an employee was exposed to asbestos, not when symptoms appeared.
It was asked to rule on the issue after judges in lower courts failed to agree.
Relatives of workers who died of the cancer mesothelioma want to make claims on policies dating from the 1940s.Relatives of workers who died of the cancer mesothelioma want to make claims on policies dating from the 1940s.
They had a success in 2008, when the High Court said firms' insurers at the time workers inhaled fibres were liable. The Association of British Insurers welcomed the ruling, and blamed a small group of insurers for the legal battle.
But two years later the Court of Appeal said that in some cases liability was triggered when symptoms developed, and sometimes decades after exposure. The Supreme Court was asked to rule on the issue after judges in lower courts failed to agree.
Families had a success in 2008, when the High Court said firms' insurers at the time workers inhaled fibres were liable.
But two years later the Court of Appeal said that in some cases liability was triggered when symptoms developed - which could be decades after exposure.
Lawyers said the appeal court ruling had left victims' families facing "confusion and uncertainty".Lawyers said the appeal court ruling had left victims' families facing "confusion and uncertainty".
The new ruling by a panel of five Supreme Court justices states that the disease can be said to have been "sustained" by an employee in the period when it was caused or initiated.The new ruling by a panel of five Supreme Court justices states that the disease can be said to have been "sustained" by an employee in the period when it was caused or initiated.
One of the judges, Lord Clarke, said: "The negligent exposure of an employee to asbestos during the [insurance] policy period has a sufficient causal link with subsequently arising mesothelioma to trigger the insurer's obligation."One of the judges, Lord Clarke, said: "The negligent exposure of an employee to asbestos during the [insurance] policy period has a sufficient causal link with subsequently arising mesothelioma to trigger the insurer's obligation."
Unite, the largest trade union in Britain and the Irish Republic, welcomed the ruling, which it said will affect "many of the 2,500 people who are diagnosed with mesothelioma each year".
Unite's challenge was on behalf of the family of Charles O'Farrell, a retired member who died of mesothelioma in 2003.
Commenting on the Supreme Court's decision, Unite general secretary Len McCluskey said: "This is a landmark ruling which will affect thousands of victims of asbestos.
"It is a disgrace that insurance companies went to such lengths to shirk their responsibilities."
Mr O'Farrell's daughter, Maureen Edwards, said: "This is the right decision. I am delighted for all those families who have been awaiting this result.
"My dad worked all his life and was hoping to enjoy retirement before mesothelioma took him away.
"There was never any question about who was to blame - all this long battle was about was insurers wanting to get out of paying."
Nick Starling, Director of General Insurance and Health at the Association of British Insurers. said: "The ABI and our members are committed to paying compensation as quickly as possible to people with mesothelioma who have been exposed to asbestos in the workplace.
"We have always opposed the attempt to change the basis on which mesothelioma claims should be paid, as argued by those who brought this litigation. Today's ruling by the Supreme Court has confirmed what most in the industry have always understood - that the insurer on cover when the claimant was exposed to asbestos should pay the claim, rather than the insurer on cover when the mesothelioma develops.
"This case has been pursued by a small group of 'run-off' insurers acting independently and at odds with the views of the majority of the UK insurance industry.
"We are pleased that the Supreme Court has overruled the Court of Appeal's judgment on this point as it ensures that claimants should get the compensation they reasonably expect. As such, the judgment provides clarity and certainty for both mesothelioma claimants and insurers.
'Financial security'
A lawyer representing the lead claimant said the judgement provided "clarity, consistency and comfort" for the families of thousands of mesothelioma victims.
Helen Ashton from Irwin Mitchell said: "This judgment means that the thousands of people who are yet to be given the devastating news that they have the deadly illness will at least know that their families can get access to justice and receive the financial security they need.
"But the sad fact is that many victims of mesothelioma who have been awaiting the outcome of this appeal may not have lived long enough to know if their families will now receive the compensation they deserve."
She said asbestos-related disease caused more than 5,000 deaths every year.
The number of people affected by mesothelioma was still rising because of the time it can take for this illness to develop and was expected to peak around 2015, she added.
Ms Ashton confirmed too that the news was a great relief to her client Ruth Durham, who had continued the legal battle in memory of her father Leslie Screach, the first person in this litigation to bring a claim and therefore the lead case throughout the six-year process.
"The previous ruling, which thankfully has been overturned, would have led to a pot luck situation where the very wording of their employer's insurance policies, which many of the victims would not have even seen, would have been retrospectively reviewed to see whether they could bring a claim or not," Ms Ashton said.
"The ruling will also have important wider implications for people suffering from all workplace illnesses. This will impact on anyone suffering illnesses or injuries at work that can take a long time to develop. People have the basic right to be able to go to work and come home unharmed from carrying out their general day to day duties."