Press Release…Press Release

(Embargoed until 00.1 3rd June 2008)

 

Asbestos Victims Support Groups Forum UK

 

Insurers Pull the “Trigger” on Dying Asbestos Victims

 

The “Trigger” Issue

Asbestos Victims Support Groups warn that another test case launched by insurers could deny compensation to thousands of asbestos victims. 

 

In this test case insurers argue that the wording of employers’ liability insurance policies says that the insurance is only “triggered” when an asbestos disease develops, i.e. when it is diagnosed. They argue this despite the fact it has always been accepted that insurance policies cover the worker when they were at work, i.e. when exposure to asbestos occurred.

 

The interpretation of the effective date of an insurance policy is crucial. Because asbestos disease does not develop until decades after exposure to asbestos occurred, it is likely that the employers will no longer be trading and there will no longer be an insurer to pay compensation at the onset of an asbestos disease.

 

The “Trigger” Test Case 3rd June

Six test cases are to be heard to determine the outcome of the “trigger” issue. The cases will be heard in the High Court in London on the 3rd June. If the court decides that the trigger date is the date of onset of disease, the effect would be catastrophic for asbestos victims and far worse than the potential effect of any of the other test cases run by insurers.

 

The Response to the “Trigger” Issue

Many cases have been delayed pending the hearing on the 3rd June and many mesothelioma sufferers will have died while waiting for the Court’s decision.

 

Mrs. Maureen Edwards, daughter of Charles O’Farrell who died from mesothelioma and whose case is one of the six to be heard said:

“My late father, a war veteran, was known as “Tiger” to his friends and workmates; I intend to fight like one in the knowledge that thousands of victims stricken by this terminal, man-made disease will fail to receive justice if the insurance industry wins the case”. She added “It’s the insurance industry that pulled the trigger on my late father as they have done to countless others who were never protected from the dangers of asbestos whilst earning huge profits for their employers and the insurance industry”

Tony Whitston, Chair Asbestos Victims Support Groups Forum said:

Insurers wring their hands in sympathy and say they are eager to pay timely compensation to asbestos victims, especially mesothelioma sufferers, yet they have launched another test case to deprive asbestos victims of compensation: their ‘crocodile tears’ should fool no one. What is at stake here is the right of workers to be covered by employers’ liability insurance against occupational hazards when they were at work. The insurers’ convenient reinterpretation of the wording of policies robs workers of their rights and provides a windfall for insurers, which is what this test case is all about: insurers saving money at the cost of dying asbestos victims.  We’ve been here before!

For comments from people affected by this case and from the Forum please tel: 0161 636 7555 or 07748189837

      0151 236 1895 or 07791019641

 

NOTES TO EDITORS

Mesothelioma is a fatal tumour of the lining of the lung or abdomen, caused almost exclusively by asbestos, with a life expectancy from diagnosis of about 12 months. In 2005, 2,039 people died from mesothelioma. 90,000 people are expected to die from mesothelioma by 2050 from past exposure to asbestos since the epidemic began in the 1960s. About 55,000 people are yet to die from mesothelioma from past exposure.

This test trigger issue case is one of many test cases in recent years launched by the insurance industry to limit its liabilities for asbestos disease.

In the Fairchild case (2002) the House of Lords overturned an attempt by insurers to say that since no one could say which deadly asbestos fibre killed a mesothelioma sufferer, no employer could be found liable.

In the Barker case (2006) the government overturned a House of Lords decision which allowed apportionment of damages between guilty employers. This would have meant that compensation would have been proportionately lost where employers were no longer trading.

In the Pleural Plaques case (2008) the House of Lords abolished compensation for pleural plaques, which had been compensated in law for over 20 years.