High Court Delves into Social History to Resolve Widow’s Asbestos Claim

Many people are still being carried off by merciless cancer due to asbestos exposure in the dim and distant past. As a High Court ruling showed, it is the very passage of time that makes it so hard for their loved ones to obtain compensation.

The case concerned a former plasterer who…

Mar 15, 2023

Pexels adrien olichon 2663254 1024x683

Many people are still being carried off by merciless cancer due to asbestos exposure in the dim and distant past. As a High Court ruling showed, it is the very passage of time that makes it so hard for their loved ones to obtain compensation.

The case concerned a former plasterer who died, aged 72, from mesothelioma – an incurable form of cancer that commonly takes decades to develop and can be caused by breathing in a single asbestos fibre. His widow launched a personal injury claim against a company for which he worked in the mid- to late 1970s.

Ruling on the matter, the Court observed that the case involved delving back into a period of social history when vast numbers of low-cost homes were being built so that inner-city dwellers could move away from old and decrepit housing stock. The man’s role was to erect plasterboards in newly constructed homes.

In dismissing the widow’s claim, the Court noted that the relevant events took place more than 40 years ago. On the evidence, she had failed to establish her case that, when it rained, carpenters came indoors – where her husband was working – to cut up boards that were used to make rooves watertight. It had also not been proved that it was more likely than not that the boards contained asbestos.

The Court noted that asbestos is cheap, versatile and strong, but can also be lethal. It was undoubtedly used in many of the huge residential construction projects of the time. The man was certainly exposed to asbestos at some point in his working life, but it had not been shown that it was whilst he was working for the company.

The case highlighted the intense fragility of life. The man was a fighter and his wife was devastated when he lost his terrible struggle against cancer. The rejection of her claim would seem to her a further insult. In seeking to discern where the truth lay, however, the Court was required to put sympathy and compassion to one side.

Whistleblowing and the Importance of Proving Motive – Guideline Ruling

Establishing that an employee has made a protected disclosure is the first step on the path to success in any whistleblowing claim. However, as a case concerning a dismissed care homes manager showed, it is often much harder to prove that detrimental treatment is motivated by such a disclosure. The woman had been in post for only about six months when she was dismissed at the end of her probationary period. Her employer asserted that she was dismissed on grounds of capability or performance.…

Discrimination and the Burden of Proof – Supreme Court Clarifies the Law

Ever since a crucial alteration was made to the wording of the Equality Act 2010, the question of where the burden of proof lies in employment discrimination cases has been the focus of intense legal debate. An important Supreme Court ruling has, however, resolved the issue once and for all. The case concerned a postman who was born in Nigeria and identified as black African and Nigerian. He had qualifications in computing and wished to obtain a managerial or technical role within Royal Mail.…

Employment v Self-Employment – This is Why the Distinction Really Matters

Employment law has moved on in leaps and bounds since the bad old days of mass casual labour. However, as an Employment Tribunal (ET) decision showed, a large number of people still go to work every day without any clear idea of whether they are employed or self-employed, or any understanding of why that distinction matters. The case concerned a van driver who worked for the same company (C1) for about 17 years before it was taken over by another (C2). The latter accepted that it was obliged by…