A CAMPAIGN to overturn a piece of Scots law that allows industrial workers to claim compensation for an asbestos-linked medical condition was condemned last night by one of the country's most influential solicitors.
Frank Maguire, a senior partner in Thompsons in Glasgow, said that respect must be shown to the 2009 Holyrood legislation that protects the rights of those former employees now suffering from pleural plaques, or scarring of the lungs, following exposure to the substance.
More than 1000 Scots workers, mainly from a shipbuilding, construction or engineering background, are making claims against their former employers after developing the condition. Most could be awarded around £10,000 if their actions are successful.
Campaigners declared a short-lived victory yesterday after the Court of Session threw out a second appeal by the insurance industry, which claims that pleural plaques should not be compensated for as they produce no symptoms.
The Association of British Insurers (ABI) vowed to carry on trying to remove the law from the statute books by taking their case to the Supreme Court.
Mr Maguire said some clients had been waiting for more than four years to pursue an action.
He said: “The claims will be kept in abeyance until the Supreme Court process has taken its course.
“This is an Act of the Scottish Parliament and it should be respected. It is a democratically elected body and knows best about social justice and that should be recognised.
“The court has already recognised that the best decider of this is the Scottish Parliament and I do believe that the Supreme Court will come to the same conclusion.
“The insurers now have to do the decent thing and no longer delay payments for wrongful conduct in exposing employees to asbestos exposure by employers, thus prolonging the victims’ agony.”
Pleural plaques are caused by tiny grains of asbestos in the respiratory system. There is a lack of proof that the condition develops into other serious respiratory diseases such as mesothelioma and asbestosis.
However, compensation claims are made because of the anxiety suffered by a client after diagnosis of pleural plaques, given they are proof of exposure to asbestos that can lead to such conditions.
Former builder George O’Donnell, 82, from Glasgow’s east end, was diagnosed with pleural plaques two years ago and developed incurable mesothelioma last year. His daughter, Elaine Darling said he was unlikely to survive the 18 months it would take for the case to go to the Supreme Court.
“It’s frightening how quickly something that has been inside him for years can take effect,” she said.
Legislation was introduced in Scotland after the House of Lords decided in 2007 that compensation could not be paid to those suffering from pleural plaques. The ruling followed a judicial review of a Court of Appeal ruling that compensation could not be claimed for such a condition. The result had no bearing on cases north of the Border because the case was raised in the English courts.
Nick Starling, ABI’s director of general insurance and health, said: “The insurers who brought this judicial review did so because there are fundamental legal principles at stake, and they remain confident that there is significant substance in their grounds for challenging the Damages Act.
“The insurers are therefore preparing to appeal the judgment to the Supreme Court.”
Clydeside Action on Asbestos said delaying tactics had contributed to sufferers’ anxiety.
A spokesman for the Scottish Government said: “The Scottish Government has noted the decision reached at the Court of Session today in relation to the Damages (Asbestos-related Conditions) (Scotland) Act 2009.
“Passed with overwhelming support in the Scottish Parliament, the Act was designed to preserve the established practice of the past two decades, allowing access to justice and compensation for people who have developed pleural plaques as a result of negligent exposure to asbestos.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article