Personnel Today
  • OHW+
  • Resources
    • Clinical governance
    • Disability
    • Ergonomics
    • Health surveillance
    • OH employment law
    • OH service delivery
    • Research
    • Return to work and rehabilitation
    • Sickness absence management
    • Wellbeing and health promotion
  • Conditions
    • Mental health
    • Musculoskeletal disorders
    • Blood pressure
    • Cancer
    • Cardiac
    • Dementia
    • Diabetes
    • Respiratory
    • Stroke
  • CPD
  • Webinars
  • Jobs
  • Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • OHW+
  • Resources
    • Clinical governance
    • Disability
    • Ergonomics
    • Health surveillance
    • OH employment law
    • OH service delivery
    • Research
    • Return to work and rehabilitation
    • Sickness absence management
    • Wellbeing and health promotion
  • Conditions
    • Mental health
    • Musculoskeletal disorders
    • Blood pressure
    • Cancer
    • Cardiac
    • Dementia
    • Diabetes
    • Respiratory
    • Stroke
  • CPD
  • Webinars
  • Jobs
  • Personnel Today

Health and safetyLatest NewsWellbeingOccupational Health

Families vow to fight ruling on asbestos liability payouts

by Michael Millar 9 May 2006
by Michael Millar 9 May 2006

Families of workers who contracted cancer after working with asbestos have vowed to fight for a change in the law after the House of Lords ruled that employers’ liability for compensation should be restricted.

Last week’s judgment means compensation payouts to sufferers of the fatal lung disease mesothelioma – which kills 1,900 people every year in the UK – and their families, will be drastically reduced in many cases. The move could save millions of pounds for employers.

The House of Lords upheld three test appeals in which it was argued that damages awards should be limited in cases where the employee in question had worked for several employers, none of which could be specifically blamed for the onset of the disease.

Tony Whitston, chairman of the Greater Manchester Asbestos Victims Support Group, slammed the decision. He claimed that many employers were more worried about cutting costs than workers’ health.

“It’s all about money – justice has been the victim of an incessant pursuit by insurers and employers to reduce the money they have to pay,”
he told Personnel Today. “Because of this judgment, cases will be much longer and more costly.”

Tom Brennan, GMB regional secretary, said the union would back a call for the government to introduce legislation “so that our members and dependants get the compensation they deserve”.

Nick Starling, director of general insurance at the Association of British Insurers, whose members stand to benefit from the ruling, said: “This is a very detailed and complex judgment, and the industry will study it carefully to examine the implications for claimants and insurers.

“Our overriding commitment is to ensure that claimants receive the compensation to which they are entitled.”

The cases in the appeal were Barker v St Gobain Pipelines, Murray v British Shipbuilders and Patterson v Smiths Dock.

Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance

Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday

OptOut
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

JUDGMENT REASONING

Four years ago, in a similar claim, the Law Lords ruled that an employer who negligently exposed a worker to asbestos could be held 100% liable, even if the employee had worked for several companies, and it could not be proved which of them had caused the illness. But in this appeal, it was contended that an employer’s liability should be limited on a percentage basis to reflect the extent to which it contributed to an employee’s exposure to asbestos.


Michael Millar

previous post
Traumatised Tube workers get horse whisperer therapy
next post
Health trusts provide on-demand childcare

You may also like

Number of Neet women rises but figures fall...

23 May 2025

Bank holidays: six things employers need to know

23 May 2025

Unions ponder strike action after public sector pay...

23 May 2025

Personnel Today Awards 2025: Three weeks left to...

23 May 2025

Sighing in frustration at colleague was discriminatory, judge...

23 May 2025

Flexible working for teachers initiative extended

23 May 2025

Fire and rehire: the relocation question

22 May 2025

Public sector workers gain pay rises of up...

22 May 2025

Six ways to kickstart conversations about team stress...

22 May 2025

UK net migration slashed by half in one...

22 May 2025

  • 2025 Employee Communications Report PROMOTED | HR and leadership...Read more
  • The Majority of Employees Have Their Eyes on Their Next Move PROMOTED | A staggering 65%...Read more
  • Prioritising performance management: Strategies for success (webinar) WEBINAR | In today’s fast-paced...Read more
  • Self-Leadership: The Key to Successful Organisations PROMOTED | Eletive is helping businesses...Read more
  • Retaining Female Talent: Four Ways to Reduce Workplace Drop Out PROMOTED | International Women’s Day...Read more

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2025

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2025 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • OHW+
  • Resources
    • Clinical governance
    • Disability
    • Ergonomics
    • Health surveillance
    • OH employment law
    • OH service delivery
    • Research
    • Return to work and rehabilitation
    • Sickness absence management
    • Wellbeing and health promotion
  • Conditions
    • Mental health
    • Musculoskeletal disorders
    • Blood pressure
    • Cancer
    • Cardiac
    • Dementia
    • Diabetes
    • Respiratory
    • Stroke
  • CPD
  • Webinars
  • Jobs
  • Personnel Today