In a decision that will not bode well for insurance companies, an electrician has been awarded damages for an illness triggered by exposure to asbestos.
The victim, 70-year-old Ken Morton, was diagnosed in 2006 with asbestosis illness causing him 2-3% disability. He had a long career of 45 years during which he was exposed to asbestos frequently.
The employer was Campbell & Isherwood Limited, and investigations conducted by Unite’s lawyers, Thompsons Solicitors showed that Morton was recklessly exposed to asbestos at different times between 1954 and 1983 while working at different sites all over UK.
The company was admittedly to blame for the illness, but the insurers refused to pay any compensation, based on the decision passed by the House of Lords, which did not permit compensation to be paid to victims suffering from pleural plaques.
However, this did not deter the litigators as Thompsons argued that asbestosis was different from pleural plaques, and that judging by the facts of the case, it was a disease, which had to be compensated for by the insurers. The insurers finally agreed to settle the case provisionally paying a compensation of £5,000 just before trial.
Paul Finegan from Unite said that the House of Lords decision on pleural plaques is being interpreted as having implications that extend to other injury types, which are work related. Consequently, it is encouraging arguments from insurers about refraining from compensating those identified with other conditions of asbestos related illness. It is necessary to control these arguments and protect the rights of such victims as well as to dissuade employers from risking the life of workers. COSHH assessor training can be of benefit to your organisation to enable you to put together plans to prevent and control the use of hazardous substances so that your business and your employees can work safely – click on COSHH training for course details.
Thompsons Solicitors lawyer Joanne Candlish stated the case was an example of how devious insurers twisted the decision to suit their purpose to avoid legitimate compensation. Mr. Morton’s interim settlement meant that he would receive some payments now, and leave a window open for additional compensation later in the event of his condition deteriorating or on developing an acute asbestos related illness.
