header-logo header-logo

Asbestos records & mixed injury whiplash

171882
Vijay Ganapathy analyses an appeal of two historic tort cases while Claire Spearpoint discusses mixed injury claims
  • The Court of Appeal considered whether defendants should have been aware of the dangers of low-level asbestos exposure in the 1950s.
  • Clarity was provided by a Supreme Court ruling relating to the Whiplash Injury Regulations 2021 in mixed injury cases.

In March 2024, the appeal courts handed down two eagerly awaited judgments.

The first of these centred on whether defendants should owe a duty of care to those who develop respiratory disease from low-level asbestos exposure where the alleged tort occurred many decades in the past. While asbestos was known to be dangerous right from the start of the 20th century, there appears some uncertainty as to whether low-level exposure was harmful until just after 1960, when the link between this and mesothelioma (a terminal cancer of the lung lining) was discovered.

In White and others v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care; Cuthbert (executrix of the estate of Derek Barry Cuthbert deceased) v Taylor Woodrow Construction

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