British companies and their insurers won a legal bid to limit compensation paid out for asbestos-related deaths and illnesses.


The House of Lords, the U.K.'s highest court, today ruled that employers aren't liable for the full damages awarded to sufferers of mesothelioma, an asbestos-related cancer, if a worker was exposed to the substance at more than one job or while self- employed.
Insurers acting on behalf of Corus Group Plc, Britain's biggest steelmaker, and other companies brought three test cases to clarify an earlier ruling that allows mesothelioma victims to sue any former employers that exposed them to asbestos, without having to prove which exposure caused the cancer.


Mesothelioma kills around 1,800 people every year in Britain, leading to millions of pounds in compensation claims. Damages typically top out around 150,000 ($270,000) pounds, according to lawyers specializing in asbestos work.

The lead claim in today's ruling involved a 57-year-old steel worker, Vernon Barker, who died from mesothelioma in 1996. Corus, which has assumed the liabilities of Barker's former employer, argued that it should only have to pay part of the 152,000 pounds awarded to his widow because he had also been exposed to asbestos during a previous six-week job and as a self-employed plasterer.


Dividing Blame


The House of Lords today said that allowing employers to apportion the damages based on the degree to which each was responsible for the exposure was fairer than holding each company liable for the full damages award.

A defendant is liable for the risk of the disease which he himself has created and not for risks created by others

Lord Leonard Hoffmann wrote in the judgment.


Four of five law lords sitting on the appeal panel backed the companies' case, with Lord Alan Rodger dissenting.

I can't understand why the House of Lords would change the law to save them paying for what they have done," Barker's widow, Sylvia, said in a statement after the decision. "I'm angry that after these people took away Vernon's life, they are adding insult to injury. They admitted that they should have protected him from asbestos.

Lawyers representing the three test claimants said they would press for fresh legislation to block companies and insurers from reducing asbestos compensation.


The case is Barker v. Saint Gobain Pipelines Plc, 2006 UKHL 20.


Source: Bloomberg