header-logo header-logo

10 December 2009 / Rehana Azib
Issue: 7397 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Asbestos exposure

Rehana Azib explains why 2009 has been a bad year for defendants

There has been a flurry of recent asbestos exposure related cases providing largely good news for claimants in the context of the burden of proving causation and risk.

In Diane Willmore v Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council [2009] EWCA Civ 1211, [2009] All ER (D) 209 (Nov) the Court of Appeal was asked to address the questions of the burden of proof a claimant must surmount in order to establish material or substantial contribution to the risk of harm. It was held that there was no such thing as a safe dose of asbestos and therefore it was insufficient to eliminate one source of exposure to asbestos if another remained.

The circumstances of asbestos exposure in this case are unusual in that they do not involve exposure in the course of employment. The claimant was a former pupil of the defendant local authority school. There were three circumstances in which the trial judge had found that the claimant had been exposed to a risk from asbestos fibres, namely:
l from work done to a ceiling in

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll