Who Is To Blame?

One of the biggest issues in personal injury cases where damage is cumulative is working out who is to blame. One test is on the basis of the balance of probabilities. For example, a person deafened by noise after working in several noisy environments, may find the settlement against former employers based on the time he worked for each. A House of Lords decision, in Fairchild v Glenhaven, addressed the unusual problem where a worker suffered an injury which it is known can be caused by a single event, but where it was not known exactly when and where that event took place. Mr Fairchild was a worker who contracted mesothelioma. He sued for compensation, but failed in all courts up to the Lords because, during his employment, he had been exposed to asbestos dust by more than one employer. Accordingly, he could not prove that it was more likely than not that he had inhaled the fibre that caused the disease while working at Glenhaven's premises.

The Lords took the view that this was unfair. Mr Fairchild had clearly contracted mesothelioma as a result of exposure to asbestos and had been exposed to asbestos by Glenhaven as well as other employers. Accordingly, he could sue all or any of his former employers who had caused him to be exposed to asbestos dust.