icwales.couk June 12th 2008
Glamorgan coroner Philip Walters recorded a verdict of death due to industrial disease on an 84 year old ex miner.
Emrys James died on November 28 last year after being taken to Royal Glamorgan Hospital.
Pathologist Dr Joanne Roach told the hearing that a post mortem found embedded coal dust, known as “coal workers’ pneumoconiosis” and traces of asbestos in his lungs. She also found evidence of chronic bronchitis, but gave heart disease as the eventual cause of death.
The coroner said: “While Mr James had significant natural causes of death, it has always been my practice to record a verdict of death due to industrial disease, so the coal workers’ pneumoconiosis and asbestos are recognised as contributory factors.”
Thursday, 12 June 2008
Fears over asbestos find delays centre reopening
Glasgow Evening Times June 10th 2008:
ASBESTOS has been found at a controversial community centre - further delaying its planned re-opening.
The discovery of the toxic material at the Chirnsyde facility, which was run by alleged gangland figure Eddie Lyons, today led to calls for a full safety probe.The centre, which was built in 1967, was shut down in the wake of the 2006 murder of Eddie's nephew Michael Lyons.
It had been due to re-open this month under council management with a new name - Ashgill Recreation Centre - following a £260,000 facelift.
But because of the discovery of asbestos in the floor of the gym, and delays appointing a contractor for refurbishment work, the date has been pushed back to July 19.
Councillor Billy McAllister said he wants a full health and safety investigation carried out, despite the fact he understands that the centre was first due to reopen in May and the date has already been pushed back several times.
He said: "The building could be riddled with asbestos. I will insist on a full check of the whole structure before people are allowed back in.
To read the full article please click on the following link:
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/display.var.2327282.0.fears_over_asbestos_find_delays_centre_reopening.php
ASBESTOS has been found at a controversial community centre - further delaying its planned re-opening.
The discovery of the toxic material at the Chirnsyde facility, which was run by alleged gangland figure Eddie Lyons, today led to calls for a full safety probe.The centre, which was built in 1967, was shut down in the wake of the 2006 murder of Eddie's nephew Michael Lyons.
It had been due to re-open this month under council management with a new name - Ashgill Recreation Centre - following a £260,000 facelift.
But because of the discovery of asbestos in the floor of the gym, and delays appointing a contractor for refurbishment work, the date has been pushed back to July 19.
Councillor Billy McAllister said he wants a full health and safety investigation carried out, despite the fact he understands that the centre was first due to reopen in May and the date has already been pushed back several times.
He said: "The building could be riddled with asbestos. I will insist on a full check of the whole structure before people are allowed back in.
To read the full article please click on the following link:
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/display.var.2327282.0.fears_over_asbestos_find_delays_centre_reopening.php
Hospital to isolate asbestos
Safety and Media Limited 11th June 2008
The Royal Shrewsbury Hospital is undergoing work to isolate asbestos in the maternity unit of the building. The work is essential to ensure the safety of patients, staff and visitors.
It is planned to encapsulate the substance rather than to remove it. This is in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Health and Safety Executive, (HSE).
To read the full article please click on the link below.
http://www.safetymedia.co.uk/news/asbestos/hospital_to_isolate_asbestos/147721
The Royal Shrewsbury Hospital is undergoing work to isolate asbestos in the maternity unit of the building. The work is essential to ensure the safety of patients, staff and visitors.
It is planned to encapsulate the substance rather than to remove it. This is in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Health and Safety Executive, (HSE).
To read the full article please click on the link below.
http://www.safetymedia.co.uk/news/asbestos/hospital_to_isolate_asbestos/147721
Fears over dumped asbestos pipes
The Wiltshire Times reported on 11 June 2008 that residents of Trowbridge are campaigning to get dumped asbestos pipes removed from a patch of land that is often used by children. The cracked concrete drainage pipes, containing asbestos, have been illegally dumped on ground behind Wickes building supplies store in Kennet Way Trowbridge.
The patch of ground behind the store is accessible by a path off Wyke Road and is used by children and teenagers to make dens.
The rear yard of Wickes abuts directly on to the piece of ground and is easily accessible because it is not fenced off. The pipes are on the border between public ground and the Wickes yard.
Although the locals reported the location of the pipes to West Wiltshire District Council months ago, no action has yet been taken and the pipes remain exposed on the ground.
A spokesman for the district council said: "The number of reported fly-tipping incidents has almost doubled across the district in recent months, which has heavily increased the workload of environmental enforcement officers.
"This rise is partly due to the start of the car boot sale season as excess, unsold items are often dumped in laybys.
To read the full report please click on the link below:
http://www.wiltshiretimes.co.uk/news/latestheadlines/display.var.2333698.0.fears_over_dumped_asbestos_pipes.php
The patch of ground behind the store is accessible by a path off Wyke Road and is used by children and teenagers to make dens.
The rear yard of Wickes abuts directly on to the piece of ground and is easily accessible because it is not fenced off. The pipes are on the border between public ground and the Wickes yard.
Although the locals reported the location of the pipes to West Wiltshire District Council months ago, no action has yet been taken and the pipes remain exposed on the ground.
A spokesman for the district council said: "The number of reported fly-tipping incidents has almost doubled across the district in recent months, which has heavily increased the workload of environmental enforcement officers.
"This rise is partly due to the start of the car boot sale season as excess, unsold items are often dumped in laybys.
To read the full report please click on the link below:
http://www.wiltshiretimes.co.uk/news/latestheadlines/display.var.2333698.0.fears_over_dumped_asbestos_pipes.php
New research body targets cure for asbestos illnesses
ABC News Australia reported on June 11th 2008 that a new Brisbane-based research group hope to improve treatments and quality of life for people with asbestos-related diseases.
The Asbestos Research Group, based at Brisbane's Wesley Hospital, will examine the progression of diseases like mesothelioma and the impact of reduced lung capacity.
Karen Banton, the widow of mesothelioma victim and campaigner Bernie Banton, says while a cure for the disease is a long way off, more can be done in the short term.
"To give better quality of life, improved quality of life to asbestos sufferers and also to make it easier for their families," she said.
"Just to give them hope really that what they're going through will not befall other families and that one day there will be a cure for these insidious diseases."
Dr Roger Allen says about 27,000 Australians will die from mesothelioma in the next 40 years and researchers are hoping to find a cure.
"I think that's a long way off but we have to start somewhere," he said.
"We don't even know why certain types of asbestos cause mesothelioma - they occur in various ratios so that some types of asbestos fibres are more virulent than others, are more likely to produce cancer.
"They're really basic questions that we can't even answer, let alone treat it."
The Asbestos Research Group, based at Brisbane's Wesley Hospital, will examine the progression of diseases like mesothelioma and the impact of reduced lung capacity.
Karen Banton, the widow of mesothelioma victim and campaigner Bernie Banton, says while a cure for the disease is a long way off, more can be done in the short term.
"To give better quality of life, improved quality of life to asbestos sufferers and also to make it easier for their families," she said.
"Just to give them hope really that what they're going through will not befall other families and that one day there will be a cure for these insidious diseases."
Dr Roger Allen says about 27,000 Australians will die from mesothelioma in the next 40 years and researchers are hoping to find a cure.
"I think that's a long way off but we have to start somewhere," he said.
"We don't even know why certain types of asbestos cause mesothelioma - they occur in various ratios so that some types of asbestos fibres are more virulent than others, are more likely to produce cancer.
"They're really basic questions that we can't even answer, let alone treat it."
Tuesday, 10 June 2008
Court rules asbestos causes lung cancer
TUC Risks 24th May, reported that a High Court ruling has confirmed the lung cancer and asbestos link. Although it has long been accepted asbestos causes lung cancer, proving the link in court has been difficult because, unlike mesothelioma, the condition can be caused by a wide range of other factors, including smoking.
The new ruling involves the case of John Joseph Shortell, who died of lung cancer on 8 July 2006 aged 74. The defendant was his former employer, BICAL Construction Ltd. It is believed this is the first case successfully contested in court, establishing that exposure to asbestos caused lung cancer in a worker without pre-existing asbestos disease. Other cases have been settled out-of-court, so not establishing a legal precedent.
Electrical jointer Mr Shortell - who had also smoked until the age of 53 - had been exposed to asbestos for the majority of his working life at a number of power stations. He working closely with laggers as they handled asbestos. Judge Mr Justice Mackay ruled that the exposure to asbestos more than doubled the claimant's risk of developing lung cancer and the fact that Mr Shortell smoked, he said, did not impact on the negligence and breaches of duty that the defendant showed over many years.
Personal injury lawyers believe the case will have huge implications for lung cancer sufferers throughout the UK who have been exposed to asbestos. Roger Maddocks of law firm Irwin Mitchell commented: 'Although the claimant was an ex-smoker, his employers repeatedly breached their duty of care towards him by exposing him to asbestos during his work and the claimant's contributory negligence, by reason of his past smoking habit, was rated at only 15 per cent. It is the first such case ever to succeed on behalf of a lung cancer sufferer who did not also have asbestosis.'
John Shortell (executor of the estate of John Joseph Shortell deceased and litigation friend of Eileen Shortell) v BICAL construction Ltd (sued as successor to BIC Construction Ltd), in the High Court of Justice (Queen's Bench Division), Liverpool District Registry, Case No: 7LV30059, 28 April - 1 May 2008.
The new ruling involves the case of John Joseph Shortell, who died of lung cancer on 8 July 2006 aged 74. The defendant was his former employer, BICAL Construction Ltd. It is believed this is the first case successfully contested in court, establishing that exposure to asbestos caused lung cancer in a worker without pre-existing asbestos disease. Other cases have been settled out-of-court, so not establishing a legal precedent.
Electrical jointer Mr Shortell - who had also smoked until the age of 53 - had been exposed to asbestos for the majority of his working life at a number of power stations. He working closely with laggers as they handled asbestos. Judge Mr Justice Mackay ruled that the exposure to asbestos more than doubled the claimant's risk of developing lung cancer and the fact that Mr Shortell smoked, he said, did not impact on the negligence and breaches of duty that the defendant showed over many years.
Personal injury lawyers believe the case will have huge implications for lung cancer sufferers throughout the UK who have been exposed to asbestos. Roger Maddocks of law firm Irwin Mitchell commented: 'Although the claimant was an ex-smoker, his employers repeatedly breached their duty of care towards him by exposing him to asbestos during his work and the claimant's contributory negligence, by reason of his past smoking habit, was rated at only 15 per cent. It is the first such case ever to succeed on behalf of a lung cancer sufferer who did not also have asbestosis.'
John Shortell (executor of the estate of John Joseph Shortell deceased and litigation friend of Eileen Shortell) v BICAL construction Ltd (sued as successor to BIC Construction Ltd), in the High Court of Justice (Queen's Bench Division), Liverpool District Registry, Case No: 7LV30059, 28 April - 1 May 2008.
Canada: Pro-asbestos lobby gets caught out
TUC Risks 31st May 2008 reported that Canada's pro-asbestos lobby has faced stern criticism for wrongly implying a long-delayed government commissioned report opposes a ban on asbestos.
Critics including the chair of the Health Canada panel of experts that prepared the report have denounced both the delay and the misrepresentation of their findings.
Health Canada hired seven scientific and medical experts from around the world last November to examine the risks of chrysotile, or white asbetsos. Leslie Stayner, head of the School of Public Health at the University of Illinois, as well as UK occupational hygiene expert Trevor Ogden, the chair of the panel of experts, have each written letters to federal health minister Tony Clement decrying the delay in publishing their findings. 'It is simply unacceptable for this report to continue to be withheld from the public, while individuals who have seen the report and our comments make erroneous allegations about what it contains to suit their political objectives,' Stayner wrote in his letter.
Last week, Bloc Québécois MP André Bellavance rose in Canada's House of Commons to argue against growing calls to ban chrysotile, implying Health Canada's new study supports his view. 'I want to make the record clear that nothing in the report would argue against the sensibility of an asbestos ban in Canada or for that matter anywhere else in the world,' Stayner told CBC News.
In his letter, Stayner said that while the panel was not asked to rule on whether chrysotile asbestos can be used safely, 'from a pragmatic point of view, my answer to this question would be that it [safe use] is simply not possible.' The controversy comes as the executive of CLC, Canada's national union federation, is recommending a policy that will see the gradual closure of the country's asbestos mines, alongside measures to address the impact of the shutdown on the affected miners.
Critics including the chair of the Health Canada panel of experts that prepared the report have denounced both the delay and the misrepresentation of their findings.
Health Canada hired seven scientific and medical experts from around the world last November to examine the risks of chrysotile, or white asbetsos. Leslie Stayner, head of the School of Public Health at the University of Illinois, as well as UK occupational hygiene expert Trevor Ogden, the chair of the panel of experts, have each written letters to federal health minister Tony Clement decrying the delay in publishing their findings. 'It is simply unacceptable for this report to continue to be withheld from the public, while individuals who have seen the report and our comments make erroneous allegations about what it contains to suit their political objectives,' Stayner wrote in his letter.
Last week, Bloc Québécois MP André Bellavance rose in Canada's House of Commons to argue against growing calls to ban chrysotile, implying Health Canada's new study supports his view. 'I want to make the record clear that nothing in the report would argue against the sensibility of an asbestos ban in Canada or for that matter anywhere else in the world,' Stayner told CBC News.
In his letter, Stayner said that while the panel was not asked to rule on whether chrysotile asbestos can be used safely, 'from a pragmatic point of view, my answer to this question would be that it [safe use] is simply not possible.' The controversy comes as the executive of CLC, Canada's national union federation, is recommending a policy that will see the gradual closure of the country's asbestos mines, alongside measures to address the impact of the shutdown on the affected miners.
MPs criticise insurance industry on asbestos claims
Legal and Medical, 6th, June 2008:
MPs spoke out in disapproval of the insurance industry’s treatment of asbestos victims.
Michael Clapham MP described the insurance industry as acting like “jackals” in their concentrated attack on paying compensation to victims of industrial illnesses.
After Excess Insurance Company Limited’s ‘trigger issue’ High Court challenge that could dramatically reduce the likelihood of mesothelioma sufferers being compensated. Mr Clapham accused the insurance industry of gross “hypocrisy” saying that on the one hand their representatives make statements that they want to ensure that payments to mesothelioma victims easy and straightforward, then in the next breath they launch expensive legal cases to deny victims compensation.
MP Jim Sherdan described asbestos victims as “being treated worse than cattle”. He argued that if animals experienced the same diseases, then the middles classes would demand that swift action was taken.The MPs were speaking in a Westminster Hall debate about the fight to restore compensation to victims of pleural plaques.
Pleural plaques are scarring of the lungs caused by heavy and long term exposure to asbestos. Pleural plaque victims are a thousand times more likely than other people of contracting the fatal lung cancer mesothelioma which kills 2,000 people a year.
A medical expert on pleural plaques, and Consultant Physician, Robin Rudd has stated that pleural plaques are a pathological change in the membrane which surrounds the lung, victims of pleural plaques are liable to pleural thickening causing breathlessness, lung cancer and mesothelioma.
Dr Rudd also found that pleural plaque sufferers suffer severe mental anxiety following diagnosis, as they fear that they will die from mesothelioma, which is incurable. During the debate it also emerged that a leading accountancy firm has estimated that the Law Lords decision on pleural plaques will save the insurance industry £1.4 billion.
MPs spoke out in disapproval of the insurance industry’s treatment of asbestos victims.
Michael Clapham MP described the insurance industry as acting like “jackals” in their concentrated attack on paying compensation to victims of industrial illnesses.
After Excess Insurance Company Limited’s ‘trigger issue’ High Court challenge that could dramatically reduce the likelihood of mesothelioma sufferers being compensated. Mr Clapham accused the insurance industry of gross “hypocrisy” saying that on the one hand their representatives make statements that they want to ensure that payments to mesothelioma victims easy and straightforward, then in the next breath they launch expensive legal cases to deny victims compensation.
MP Jim Sherdan described asbestos victims as “being treated worse than cattle”. He argued that if animals experienced the same diseases, then the middles classes would demand that swift action was taken.The MPs were speaking in a Westminster Hall debate about the fight to restore compensation to victims of pleural plaques.
Pleural plaques are scarring of the lungs caused by heavy and long term exposure to asbestos. Pleural plaque victims are a thousand times more likely than other people of contracting the fatal lung cancer mesothelioma which kills 2,000 people a year.
A medical expert on pleural plaques, and Consultant Physician, Robin Rudd has stated that pleural plaques are a pathological change in the membrane which surrounds the lung, victims of pleural plaques are liable to pleural thickening causing breathlessness, lung cancer and mesothelioma.
Dr Rudd also found that pleural plaque sufferers suffer severe mental anxiety following diagnosis, as they fear that they will die from mesothelioma, which is incurable. During the debate it also emerged that a leading accountancy firm has estimated that the Law Lords decision on pleural plaques will save the insurance industry £1.4 billion.
Fifth 'Ghost Ship' sparks new storm
Northern Echo 10th June 2008 reported that the row over the so-called "Ghost Ships" is about to reignite after it was revealed another ship containing hundreds of tonnes of asbestos-contaminated material is on its way to the North-East.
Teesside company Able UK confirmed last night that it had a contract to dismantle a ship containing more asbestos-contaminated material than all four previous ships combined.
The row over the Ghost Ships - decommissioned US naval vessels - sparked an international row when they sailed across the Atlantic to be scrapped at Able's facilities in Hartlepool.
Critics said the US should not be exporting toxic materials, but supporters said Able was facing a classic "environment v economy" dilemma.
If Able's operations take off, the business could create hundreds of jobs. The company also has world-class facilities to carry out such a contract.
The Northern Echo can reveal that the Hartlepool firm has applied for an exemption from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) so the latest vessel can be dismantled and recycled.
Able needs permission because the ship, which is arriving from Europe, contains about 700 tonnes of contaminated materials and it is illegal to import asbestos to the UK.
Environmental group The Friends of Hartlepool attacked the move and said it had not been consulted.
The HSE has given the group an extra two weeks to comment on Able's application.
A spokesman for the Friends of Hartlepool said: "We have had major concerns over the consultation on this matter, having not been made aware of Able UK's application for an exemption."
The amount of asbestos-contaminated material contained in the unnamed ship dwarfs that contained in each of the first four of the 13 ships that made up Able's original £11m contract with the US maritime administration, Marad.
According to the Environment Agency, the four vessels, which have remained moored at Able's Teesside Environmental Reclamation and Recycling Centre (Terrc), at Graythorp, near Hartlepool, since 2003, contain about 633 tonnes of asbestos contaminated material between them.
Able already has a similar exemption granted by the HSE to import asbestos, applying to the 13 former US Navy ships.
In a letter passed to The Northern Echo, Chris Gillies, principal inspector of health and safety for the HSE, states of the application: "Our intention is that any exemption granted would take effect only when Able UK had secured all necessary permissions and requirements from other regulatory agencies, in particular the Environment Agency."
In November, the company was fined £22,000 by magistrates after it failed to dispose of asbestos in the correct manner on two occasions at its Seaton Meadows landfill site in Hartlepool.
The firm blamed a bulldozer operator, working on behalf of one of its subcontractors, who had failed to follow instructions.
To read the full report please click on the link below:
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/display.var.2329851.0.fifth_ghost_ship_sparks_new_storm.php
Teesside company Able UK confirmed last night that it had a contract to dismantle a ship containing more asbestos-contaminated material than all four previous ships combined.
The row over the Ghost Ships - decommissioned US naval vessels - sparked an international row when they sailed across the Atlantic to be scrapped at Able's facilities in Hartlepool.
Critics said the US should not be exporting toxic materials, but supporters said Able was facing a classic "environment v economy" dilemma.
If Able's operations take off, the business could create hundreds of jobs. The company also has world-class facilities to carry out such a contract.
The Northern Echo can reveal that the Hartlepool firm has applied for an exemption from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) so the latest vessel can be dismantled and recycled.
Able needs permission because the ship, which is arriving from Europe, contains about 700 tonnes of contaminated materials and it is illegal to import asbestos to the UK.
Environmental group The Friends of Hartlepool attacked the move and said it had not been consulted.
The HSE has given the group an extra two weeks to comment on Able's application.
A spokesman for the Friends of Hartlepool said: "We have had major concerns over the consultation on this matter, having not been made aware of Able UK's application for an exemption."
The amount of asbestos-contaminated material contained in the unnamed ship dwarfs that contained in each of the first four of the 13 ships that made up Able's original £11m contract with the US maritime administration, Marad.
According to the Environment Agency, the four vessels, which have remained moored at Able's Teesside Environmental Reclamation and Recycling Centre (Terrc), at Graythorp, near Hartlepool, since 2003, contain about 633 tonnes of asbestos contaminated material between them.
Able already has a similar exemption granted by the HSE to import asbestos, applying to the 13 former US Navy ships.
In a letter passed to The Northern Echo, Chris Gillies, principal inspector of health and safety for the HSE, states of the application: "Our intention is that any exemption granted would take effect only when Able UK had secured all necessary permissions and requirements from other regulatory agencies, in particular the Environment Agency."
In November, the company was fined £22,000 by magistrates after it failed to dispose of asbestos in the correct manner on two occasions at its Seaton Meadows landfill site in Hartlepool.
The firm blamed a bulldozer operator, working on behalf of one of its subcontractors, who had failed to follow instructions.
To read the full report please click on the link below:
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/display.var.2329851.0.fifth_ghost_ship_sparks_new_storm.php
Mother and son died of asbestos-related cancer
Epping Forest Guardian reported on 9th June that an elderly woman died from a rare asbestos-related cancer - three years after her son passed away from the same condition.
Joan Squires, 92, of Ilford, died from mesothelioma on April 8, an inquest heard.
Mrs Squires, a retired clerical worker, had never worked in factories and had not knowingly come into contact with asbestos.
But five years ago, her son John an electrical engineer also died from the cancer aged 59.
Mrs Squire's other son Howard told Walthamstow Coroner's Court that his mother and brother may have inhaled asebstos fibres while dismantling and fixing a storage heater in their Wensleydale Avenue home in the early 1970s.
He said: "I thought it was a bit mad at the time, I thought we should have got a new storage heater rather than fix it but obviously I did not know how serious it would turn out to be."
Mesothelioma is a a rare and virulent form of cancer that affects the lining of the lung, lining of the abdominal cavity or lining around the heart. The average time between diagnosis and death is only 18 months.
It occurs in people who have breathed in asbestos fibres, in many cases 20 to 50 or more years ago.
In most cases, mesothelioma is contracted by people working on building sites, although some inhale the fibres second hand through other peoples' clothes, hairs or skin.
On March 18 this year Mrs Squires was admitted to Whipps Cross Hospital with breathing difficulties.
Following a scan doctors noticed a grey shading on her lung and she was later diagnosed with the incurable cancer.
To read the full report please click on the link below:
http://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/topstories/display.var.2329241.0.ilford_mother_and_son_died_of_asbestosrelated_cancer.php
Joan Squires, 92, of Ilford, died from mesothelioma on April 8, an inquest heard.
Mrs Squires, a retired clerical worker, had never worked in factories and had not knowingly come into contact with asbestos.
But five years ago, her son John an electrical engineer also died from the cancer aged 59.
Mrs Squire's other son Howard told Walthamstow Coroner's Court that his mother and brother may have inhaled asebstos fibres while dismantling and fixing a storage heater in their Wensleydale Avenue home in the early 1970s.
He said: "I thought it was a bit mad at the time, I thought we should have got a new storage heater rather than fix it but obviously I did not know how serious it would turn out to be."
Mesothelioma is a a rare and virulent form of cancer that affects the lining of the lung, lining of the abdominal cavity or lining around the heart. The average time between diagnosis and death is only 18 months.
It occurs in people who have breathed in asbestos fibres, in many cases 20 to 50 or more years ago.
In most cases, mesothelioma is contracted by people working on building sites, although some inhale the fibres second hand through other peoples' clothes, hairs or skin.
On March 18 this year Mrs Squires was admitted to Whipps Cross Hospital with breathing difficulties.
Following a scan doctors noticed a grey shading on her lung and she was later diagnosed with the incurable cancer.
To read the full report please click on the link below:
http://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/topstories/display.var.2329241.0.ilford_mother_and_son_died_of_asbestosrelated_cancer.php
Tuesday, 3 June 2008
Spain workers can sue over ship asbestos
The Associated Press
Published: May 27, 2008
Fifteen Spanish workers can sue an American company in a New Jersey state court for asbestos-related illnesses they claim were caused while working on U.S. Navy ships in Spain, a state appellate panel ruled on Tuesday.
The 3-0 ruling revived the workers' lawsuit by reversing a lower court ruling that had dismissed the lawsuit against manufacturer Owens-Illinois Inc. on jurisdictional grounds.
The workers claim they were exposed to asbestos insulating products from 1950 to 1998 that were made at Owens-Illinois plants in New Jersey. Owens-Illinois is based in Perrysburg, Ohio, and incorporated in Delaware.
A lawyer for the company, John C. Garde, said no decision had been made on whether to appeal the ruling, but he questioned why the court would allow the case to be tried in New Jersey given that the injuries are alleged to have happened overseas.
"I find it difficult to believe that any New Jersey court would countenance claims remaining in New Jersey that have nothing to do with New Jersey, with plaintiffs who have never even set foot in New Jersey," Garde said.
The lawyer for the workers, Mitchell S. Cohen, said the judge who dismissed the case initially should have considered that New Jersey was the only court where the case can be tried before dismissing it.
"Spanish law will not allow, under the facts of these cases, to file a claim in Spain," Cohen said. That's because the injuries took place on sovereign U.S. territory — the Navy warships, he said.
The Spanish tradesmen said they were employed by private contractors or the Navy, and worked at the jointly owned U.S.-Spanish military installation in Rota, Spain, or at neighboring private shipyards in Cadiz, Spain. They sued in 2004.
The appellate decision, written by Appellate Judge Anthony J. Parrillo, said the lower court judge should have given more consideration to the workers' choice of court.
"We agree and conclude that the determination to dismiss plaintiffs' actions in favor of a foreign jurisdiction was a clearly mistaken exercise of the court's discretion," the opinion said.
The panel said Owens-Illinois would not be overburdened by a case in the United States because "key corporate evidence and witnesses relating to the development, testing, marketing and sale of (asbestos products) to the U.S. government or military are more likely available in this country."
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/05/27/america/NA-GEN-US-Spain-Asbestos.php
Published: May 27, 2008
Fifteen Spanish workers can sue an American company in a New Jersey state court for asbestos-related illnesses they claim were caused while working on U.S. Navy ships in Spain, a state appellate panel ruled on Tuesday.
The 3-0 ruling revived the workers' lawsuit by reversing a lower court ruling that had dismissed the lawsuit against manufacturer Owens-Illinois Inc. on jurisdictional grounds.
The workers claim they were exposed to asbestos insulating products from 1950 to 1998 that were made at Owens-Illinois plants in New Jersey. Owens-Illinois is based in Perrysburg, Ohio, and incorporated in Delaware.
A lawyer for the company, John C. Garde, said no decision had been made on whether to appeal the ruling, but he questioned why the court would allow the case to be tried in New Jersey given that the injuries are alleged to have happened overseas.
"I find it difficult to believe that any New Jersey court would countenance claims remaining in New Jersey that have nothing to do with New Jersey, with plaintiffs who have never even set foot in New Jersey," Garde said.
The lawyer for the workers, Mitchell S. Cohen, said the judge who dismissed the case initially should have considered that New Jersey was the only court where the case can be tried before dismissing it.
"Spanish law will not allow, under the facts of these cases, to file a claim in Spain," Cohen said. That's because the injuries took place on sovereign U.S. territory — the Navy warships, he said.
The Spanish tradesmen said they were employed by private contractors or the Navy, and worked at the jointly owned U.S.-Spanish military installation in Rota, Spain, or at neighboring private shipyards in Cadiz, Spain. They sued in 2004.
The appellate decision, written by Appellate Judge Anthony J. Parrillo, said the lower court judge should have given more consideration to the workers' choice of court.
"We agree and conclude that the determination to dismiss plaintiffs' actions in favor of a foreign jurisdiction was a clearly mistaken exercise of the court's discretion," the opinion said.
The panel said Owens-Illinois would not be overburdened by a case in the United States because "key corporate evidence and witnesses relating to the development, testing, marketing and sale of (asbestos products) to the U.S. government or military are more likely available in this country."
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/05/27/america/NA-GEN-US-Spain-Asbestos.php
Storm over asbestos waste site proposals
02 June 2008
A STORM of opposition has blown up over plans to build an asbestos waste site just yards from homes.
Aspect Contracts has submitted a planning application to Derbyshire County Council for a 'waste transfer station' on Whitting Valley Road, Whittington Moor in Chesterfield.The Essex-based firm has earmarked the former Haydon Concrete depot to store construction and demolition rubbish before moving it on to landfill tips. Uncontaminated waste would be taken to recycling centres.
The plan has alarmed and angered residents who fear it could endanger their health. They have launched a campaign to stop the development going ahead.
The Residents Against Asbestos Waste - or RAAW - campaign says as much as three-quarters of the waste will contain asbestos.
Chesterfield councillors have already unanimously recommended to Derbyshire County Council that the plan be rejected as "the site is not considered to be an appropriate site for waste transfer uses because of its proximity to residential properties", and Chesterfield MP Paul Holmes has also slammed the plans.
He said: "I simply cannot understand why anyone would choose to locate such a site not only very close to a residential area and a children's play area, but in a flood zone at the centre of a large urban population."Every single lorry load of asbestos contaminated waste - 7,000 tonnes of material a year - would have to be trucked through the streets of Chesterfield, with its 100,000 plus population, and then out again."
In its application the company says an estimated 73 per cent of stored material would contain asbestos and the remaining 27 per cent would be non-hazardous household, construction and industrial waste.
Proposed lorry routes could include Whitting Valley Road, Whitting Hill Road, Chesterfield's ring road, the A61, the A617, the M1 motorway and Chatsworth Road.The company claims the operation would be completely safe, with waste in enclosed lockable containers sealed at all times while not in use. They say the development would fulfil a waste management need as the only one of its type in the area, and that it would reduce landfill. An Aspect spokesperson said: "All asbestos waste is inspected and packaged and sealed in accordance with legislation and, as a result, no escape of waste, dust or debris occurs."The application is due to be heard by Derbyshire County Council in the next few weeks.
http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/Storm-over-asbestos-waste-site.4139409.jp
A STORM of opposition has blown up over plans to build an asbestos waste site just yards from homes.
Aspect Contracts has submitted a planning application to Derbyshire County Council for a 'waste transfer station' on Whitting Valley Road, Whittington Moor in Chesterfield.The Essex-based firm has earmarked the former Haydon Concrete depot to store construction and demolition rubbish before moving it on to landfill tips. Uncontaminated waste would be taken to recycling centres.
The plan has alarmed and angered residents who fear it could endanger their health. They have launched a campaign to stop the development going ahead.
The Residents Against Asbestos Waste - or RAAW - campaign says as much as three-quarters of the waste will contain asbestos.
Chesterfield councillors have already unanimously recommended to Derbyshire County Council that the plan be rejected as "the site is not considered to be an appropriate site for waste transfer uses because of its proximity to residential properties", and Chesterfield MP Paul Holmes has also slammed the plans.
He said: "I simply cannot understand why anyone would choose to locate such a site not only very close to a residential area and a children's play area, but in a flood zone at the centre of a large urban population."Every single lorry load of asbestos contaminated waste - 7,000 tonnes of material a year - would have to be trucked through the streets of Chesterfield, with its 100,000 plus population, and then out again."
In its application the company says an estimated 73 per cent of stored material would contain asbestos and the remaining 27 per cent would be non-hazardous household, construction and industrial waste.
Proposed lorry routes could include Whitting Valley Road, Whitting Hill Road, Chesterfield's ring road, the A61, the A617, the M1 motorway and Chatsworth Road.The company claims the operation would be completely safe, with waste in enclosed lockable containers sealed at all times while not in use. They say the development would fulfil a waste management need as the only one of its type in the area, and that it would reduce landfill. An Aspect spokesperson said: "All asbestos waste is inspected and packaged and sealed in accordance with legislation and, as a result, no escape of waste, dust or debris occurs."The application is due to be heard by Derbyshire County Council in the next few weeks.
http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/Storm-over-asbestos-waste-site.4139409.jp
UK MP To Hold Open Advice Surgery For Asbestos Victims
Bloggernews reported on June 2nd 2008 that an MP from Norwich is getting together with a leading solicitor in order to hold open advice surgeries for people that have suffered from asbestos related illnesses.
Dr Ian Gibson, MP for Norwich North, has got together with David Cass from Irwin Mitchell solicitors in Sheffield to implement the advice service.
The MP wants the surgery to be held at some point in the coming months. He has recently been campaigning for victims of pleural plaques to be able to get compensation for their illness.
Gibson stated: “David and I agreed that we would set up a surgery meeting in Norwich , so that people who were exposed to asbestos and had pleural plaques or other asbestos-related illnesses or their families did, could get legal advice. We’re hoping to set it up within the next month. I will also have to talk to the Union of Construction, Allied Trades and Technicians and the Transport and General Workers Union who will have their own lawyers, to see if we could either set up a separate meeting with them or use the same one with David.”
To read the full account please click on the link below:
http://www.bloggernews.net/116005
Dr Ian Gibson, MP for Norwich North, has got together with David Cass from Irwin Mitchell solicitors in Sheffield to implement the advice service.
The MP wants the surgery to be held at some point in the coming months. He has recently been campaigning for victims of pleural plaques to be able to get compensation for their illness.
Gibson stated: “David and I agreed that we would set up a surgery meeting in Norwich , so that people who were exposed to asbestos and had pleural plaques or other asbestos-related illnesses or their families did, could get legal advice. We’re hoping to set it up within the next month. I will also have to talk to the Union of Construction, Allied Trades and Technicians and the Transport and General Workers Union who will have their own lawyers, to see if we could either set up a separate meeting with them or use the same one with David.”
To read the full account please click on the link below:
http://www.bloggernews.net/116005
Asbestos inquiry chairman defends decision on names
The Northern Echo 3rd June 2008 reported that the chairman of the inquiry into the asbestos scandal at a council has defended the decision not to name the people behind the incident.
Staff at a County Durham sports centre were left to work unprotected with the toxic materials for five years after their bosses were warned about the danger.
A report into the incident was published last week, but the Wear Valley District Council officials involved are not named, despite calls from victims to bring their bosses to account.
Peter Kemp was appointed the inquiry's independent chairman last year. The retired council chief executive, from Northumberland, was asked to find out what happened to a 2001 asbestos report for Woodhouse Close Leisure Centre, in Bishop Auckland.
He concluded that the warning was never acted on because officers did not know who was supposed to take responsibility for asbestos. Mr Kemp said none of the officials who were interviewed about the incident were named, because the council did not ask the inquiry panel to do so. Mr Kemp said: "We were not asked to name anybody. We were asked to find the root cause of the incident. "We stuck firmly to the terms of reference set by the council and we had no problem with them."
The council did not act on the warning until a member of staff reported the authority to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) in 2006.
The HSE took the case to court in August last year, and the council was fined £18,000. After guilty pleas to six offences, the court was told that all the senior officers in charge in 2001 had since left the council.
To read the full report please click on the link below.
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/topstories/display.var.2314062.0.asbestos_inquiry_chairman_defends_decision_on_names.php
Staff at a County Durham sports centre were left to work unprotected with the toxic materials for five years after their bosses were warned about the danger.
A report into the incident was published last week, but the Wear Valley District Council officials involved are not named, despite calls from victims to bring their bosses to account.
Peter Kemp was appointed the inquiry's independent chairman last year. The retired council chief executive, from Northumberland, was asked to find out what happened to a 2001 asbestos report for Woodhouse Close Leisure Centre, in Bishop Auckland.
He concluded that the warning was never acted on because officers did not know who was supposed to take responsibility for asbestos. Mr Kemp said none of the officials who were interviewed about the incident were named, because the council did not ask the inquiry panel to do so. Mr Kemp said: "We were not asked to name anybody. We were asked to find the root cause of the incident. "We stuck firmly to the terms of reference set by the council and we had no problem with them."
The council did not act on the warning until a member of staff reported the authority to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) in 2006.
The HSE took the case to court in August last year, and the council was fined £18,000. After guilty pleas to six offences, the court was told that all the senior officers in charge in 2001 had since left the council.
To read the full report please click on the link below.
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/topstories/display.var.2314062.0.asbestos_inquiry_chairman_defends_decision_on_names.php
Cancer patient wins £5,000 bet
The Guardian 2nd June 2008 reported that a terminally ill man, who was told he had a few months to live after being diagnosed with cancer, collected £5,000 from the bookmakers yesterday.
Doctors had told Jon Matthews it was unlikely he would live to see Christmas after discovering he had mesothelioma - a cancer linked to asbestos. The 58-year-old, from Milton Keynes, placed a £100 bet that he would still be around in a year. Matthews, who was diagnosed in April 2006, was told the longest anyone had survived was 25 months.
"Today is 25 months and a week, so I've beaten that record. I do get bad days, obviously, but I'm feeling fine today. Everyone's feeling fine if they're going to pick up five grand," he said.
He said half the money would go to the cancer charity Macmillan. "The other half I'm going to spend on myself - booze and fags probably - I don't have anything to lose."
Doctors had told Jon Matthews it was unlikely he would live to see Christmas after discovering he had mesothelioma - a cancer linked to asbestos. The 58-year-old, from Milton Keynes, placed a £100 bet that he would still be around in a year. Matthews, who was diagnosed in April 2006, was told the longest anyone had survived was 25 months.
"Today is 25 months and a week, so I've beaten that record. I do get bad days, obviously, but I'm feeling fine today. Everyone's feeling fine if they're going to pick up five grand," he said.
He said half the money would go to the cancer charity Macmillan. "The other half I'm going to spend on myself - booze and fags probably - I don't have anything to lose."
Families seek compensation ruling for deaths linked to asbestos
The Guardian 2nd June 2008 reported that redress for the families of thousands of workers killed by the fatal asbestos-related cancer mesothelioma hinges on the outcome of a nine-week high court battle which starts on 3rd June.
Families of those who have already died from the disease and of those who develop it in future could be left without any compensation, depending on how the court interprets the wording of employers' insurance policies.
Lawyers say the six test cases, which go to the high court in London tomorrow, are the most important in the current wave of litigation stemming from insurers' attempts to hold back the tide of liability claims. Some 2,000 people a year are diagnosed with mesothelioma in the UK, and actuaries believe the numbers have not yet peaked.
Asbestos was widely used in many industries between 1950 and the early 1980s and was finally banned in 1999. But mesothelioma can take 40 years or more after exposure to develop.
In the meantime, many employers have gone out of business and in some cases their insurers have become insolvent.
In one of the test cases, the family of Charles O'Farrell, who died from mesothelioma in 2003, won a court judgment for £152,000 in compensation. But Excess, which insured his now-defunct employer, Humphreys & Glasgow, when he worked for them as a steel erector in the 1960s, has refused to pay up.
The insurers say his injury occurred not when he was exposed to asbestos in the 60s, but when the cells in the lining of the lung began to turn malignant. Medical evidence is that this happens roughly 10 years before symptoms appear. At that point the company was no longer trading and was not covered by insurance.
Another test case is being brought by the family of Leslie Screach, who was exposed to asbestos in the mid-60s as an industrial painter and died from mesothelioma in 2003.
They have been unable to enforce a £92,000 compensation award.
The company which employed him in the 60s had gone out of business by 1993, 10 years before his illness was diagnosed, and therefore no insurance was in force then.
For decades insurers which were providing employers' liability insurance at the time workers were exposed to asbestos paid out without question for those who developed mesothelioma decades later. But since February 2006 they have been refusing to pay, pointing to an appeal court ruling that month, even though the policy in question in that case was a different type - occupiers' liability, rather than employers' liability. In that case the appeal court ruled that Bolton council's insurers in the 1960s were not liable to indemnify Bolton for a payout to the family of Gordon Green, who contracted mesothelioma around 1981 as a result of inhaling asbestos dust while helping to build a teacher training college.
The union Unite is supporting O'Farrell's daughter, Maureen Edwards, who witnessed his painful death from the disease, which kills within months of diagnosis.
"Watching him go through it was agonising for all of us. But now our grief and sorrow is being dragged out and made worse by the insurers who we feel are doing all they can to get away without accepting any responsibility," she said.
Unite's joint general secretary, Derek Simpson, said: "What's at stake here is millions of pounds which should be used to compensate asbestos victims and not be pocketed by the insurance industry. It is a sickening scenario and we will fight every step of the way to see that insurers are not allowed to pass the buck and dodge their liabilities."
Ian McFall, head of asbestos policy at the union's solicitors, Thompsons, said: "If the insurers who deny liability are successful it will mean the policies they sold to employers, at the time when workers were being negligently exposed to asbestos, will not be worth the paper they were written on."
Families of those who have already died from the disease and of those who develop it in future could be left without any compensation, depending on how the court interprets the wording of employers' insurance policies.
Lawyers say the six test cases, which go to the high court in London tomorrow, are the most important in the current wave of litigation stemming from insurers' attempts to hold back the tide of liability claims. Some 2,000 people a year are diagnosed with mesothelioma in the UK, and actuaries believe the numbers have not yet peaked.
Asbestos was widely used in many industries between 1950 and the early 1980s and was finally banned in 1999. But mesothelioma can take 40 years or more after exposure to develop.
In the meantime, many employers have gone out of business and in some cases their insurers have become insolvent.
In one of the test cases, the family of Charles O'Farrell, who died from mesothelioma in 2003, won a court judgment for £152,000 in compensation. But Excess, which insured his now-defunct employer, Humphreys & Glasgow, when he worked for them as a steel erector in the 1960s, has refused to pay up.
The insurers say his injury occurred not when he was exposed to asbestos in the 60s, but when the cells in the lining of the lung began to turn malignant. Medical evidence is that this happens roughly 10 years before symptoms appear. At that point the company was no longer trading and was not covered by insurance.
Another test case is being brought by the family of Leslie Screach, who was exposed to asbestos in the mid-60s as an industrial painter and died from mesothelioma in 2003.
They have been unable to enforce a £92,000 compensation award.
The company which employed him in the 60s had gone out of business by 1993, 10 years before his illness was diagnosed, and therefore no insurance was in force then.
For decades insurers which were providing employers' liability insurance at the time workers were exposed to asbestos paid out without question for those who developed mesothelioma decades later. But since February 2006 they have been refusing to pay, pointing to an appeal court ruling that month, even though the policy in question in that case was a different type - occupiers' liability, rather than employers' liability. In that case the appeal court ruled that Bolton council's insurers in the 1960s were not liable to indemnify Bolton for a payout to the family of Gordon Green, who contracted mesothelioma around 1981 as a result of inhaling asbestos dust while helping to build a teacher training college.
The union Unite is supporting O'Farrell's daughter, Maureen Edwards, who witnessed his painful death from the disease, which kills within months of diagnosis.
"Watching him go through it was agonising for all of us. But now our grief and sorrow is being dragged out and made worse by the insurers who we feel are doing all they can to get away without accepting any responsibility," she said.
Unite's joint general secretary, Derek Simpson, said: "What's at stake here is millions of pounds which should be used to compensate asbestos victims and not be pocketed by the insurance industry. It is a sickening scenario and we will fight every step of the way to see that insurers are not allowed to pass the buck and dodge their liabilities."
Ian McFall, head of asbestos policy at the union's solicitors, Thompsons, said: "If the insurers who deny liability are successful it will mean the policies they sold to employers, at the time when workers were being negligently exposed to asbestos, will not be worth the paper they were written on."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
