Insurers Fail to Spread Liability for Injury

The courts are clearly minded that people who suffer from diseases arising from exposure to a harmful substance at work will not have their search for compensation frustrated.

Last year, the family of a mesothelioma (asbestosis) sufferer was awarded compensation from his previous employers in spite of it being uncertain which of them had been responsible for the exposure to asbestos that had caused the disease.

More recently, insurers attempted to reduce their liability through the defence that since they had not insured an employer for the whole of the period during which the mesothelioma sufferer worked for the company, their contribution to the damages should be reduced pro-rata so that liability would be shared with the employer’s other insurers during the period in question. Their view was that since they only carried the insurance for a little over 70 per cent of the time, they should pay only that proportion of the claim. The court rejected their argument.

This decision will make it easier for claims to be paid in some cases – especially those where the employer has used a number of insurers over the years.