Mick Knighton
Mesothelioma Research Fund

25th February 2010

National Centre on Asbestos Disease and Pleural Plaques

MKMRF are delighted the Government has outlined plans to commit £3m funding towards a National Centre for Asbestos Related Disease and plans to increase state funded lump sum payments to dependant family members. Existing awards to Mesothelioma sufferers will also be increased by 1.5% from April 1, 2010. The Government has a social and moral obligation to help future sufferers of devastating cancer, Mesothelioma and other asbestos related disease.

There was disappointment at the decision not to restore compensation for people with pleural plaques in England and Wales, but welcome a multi million pound package which will see increased state benefit payments for dependants of deceased asbestos victims and funding for research into asbestos related disease.
 
The Government confirmed fears that they would not be overturning the House of Lords ruling on pleural plaques. Instead they will make lump sum payments to those who had already begun a legal claim for pleural plaques at the time of the Law Lords’ ruling in October 2007.

It is anticipated around 6,000 people will receive ex-gratia payments of £5,000 each. Others will receive nothing despite many being diagnosed with pleural plaques before and since the House of Lords changed the law on compensation.

Thursday 12th February 2010

Today, Lord McKenzie, Minister Department of Works and Pensions, announced the publication of a consultation document to introduce a tracing office to locate employers Liability insurance and an insurance fund of last resort to pay compensation where insurance cannot be traced.

Tony Whitston, Chair, Asbestos Victims Support Groups Forum says:

“Government’s decision to set up a fund of last resort for injured workers, whose employers’ liability insurers cannot be traced, is welcomed wholeheartedly by asbestos victims throughout the UK. At last, dying asbestos victims, who, through no fault of their own, cannot trace their employers’ insurance may be able to call on a fund of last resort. This landmark decision by government addresses a long-standing and fundamental injustice and, if implemented, will provide comfort and solace to many people affected by asbestos disease.”

For further information contact Tony Whitston Tel: 0161 636 7555 and 07748189387

Employers Liability Insurance Bureau (ELIB)

Because asbestos diseases develop several decades after exposure to asbestos, companies that exposed asbestos victims to asbestos are often no longer trading by the time the disease develops. Since there has never been a system to record employers liability insurance policies, it is often impossible to trace an insurer to recover compensation.

Employers’ liability (EL) insurance has been compulsory since 1972 and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) research shows that over 99% of employers held EL insurance. But, the Association of British Insurers’ insurance tracing scheme shows for 2008 that only 46% of post-1972 insurance enquiries were successful.

In almost all cases, insurers were paid for EL insurance and the Government expects them to honour the liability they have for insurance they wrote, even if the insurance policy cannot be traced.

This approach is consistent with that taken for injured motorists where the Motor Insurance Bureau pays where a negligent motorist fails to hold insurance or that insurance cannot be traced.

27th January 2010

Dave Anderson has stood defiantly with campaigners for compensation for victims of pleural plaques. Today he outlines his determination to continue the fight.

“ I AM passionate about this issue. I hail from a mining and industrial area and know well the damage pleural plaques has done to so many innocent people. Their lives have been damaged or destroyed by their employers’ criminal actions. I was disgusted when the Law Lords overturned many years of the process of claiming compensation.

It wasn’t causing problems. It proved a day of celebration for the real culprits, the responsibility-shirking employers and for their insurers who boasted that they would save £1.4bn. That is why I have stood shoulder to shoulder with those campaigning for justice. With Jarrow MP Stephen Hepburn, the trade unions, Thompsons solicitors, and the Chronicle, we have demanded pay-outs be made available to all sufferers of the condition. I am sure campaigners will not let up in their efforts.

 I can assure them, nor will I. The case for reinstating compensation is very clear and has been ably amplified by the Chronicle’s sterling campaign. We have raised the issue on very many occasions in Parliament and in direct meetings with the Justice Secretary Jack Straw and Prime Minister Gordon Brown. Sadly, despite all of our efforts, the Government has continued to rely on the medical evidence that suggests Pleural Plaques is ‘asymptomatic’ and that it only infrequently develops into something more serious.

 We have challenged this, but their view is based on the material that the Law Lords took into consideration. I feel we have done enough to cast doubt on the medical opinion with the Government. I am more than happy to co-sponsor a private members Bill which will reverse the position to that which applied prior to the Law Lords ruling.

The real problem is the cost of compensation. Varying figures from the Government put it at between £26m and £41m. Unions suggest it would be around £35m. All these are annual figures spread over 15 years”.

8th January 2010
A judge has turned down a challenge made by insurance companies on the validity of a law that allows individuals to claim damages for asbestos-related conditions such as pleural plaques, even when the conditions are not displaying symptoms or causing disability.

The Scottish Parliament passed the Damages (Asbestos-related Conditions) (Scotland) Act 2009 – which came into force on June 17 last year- because they believed that it would be wrong to regard these conditions as trivial, and a primary purpose of the Act is to ensure that a recent decision of the House of Lords to the opposite effect should not apply in Scotland.
However, the insurance companies said that the Act violated the European Convention on Human Rights in two areas and was irrational at common law, saying that it would benefit people who have actually suffered no harm, and result in the insurers having to pay hundreds of millions, possibly  billions, of pounds due to the retrospective changes to insurance contracts.

Prior to the House of Lords ruling, British insurance companies had regularly conceded liability to pay damages for asymptomatic pleural plaques and similar asbestos-related conditions. Many claims were settled on that basis from about 1984 onwards, with awards being made by courts in England and Scotland, and it was only a sharp rise in the number and value of such claims in the early 2000s that provoked the House of Lords test cases.
The House of Lords said that damages cannot normally be claimed for medical conditions which do not display symptoms and are non-disabling. Damages cannot normally be claimed for worry or anxiety, or for the risk of future harm, or even for a combination of these.

However, a decision would have to be made on whether the claimant’s condition is bad enough to cross the threshold for a valid claim, and in borderline cases this may be difficult to determine.  Significantly, more than one of those involved in making the House of Lords decision expressed regret that claimants would be left without a remedy. The Act took a more positive view, in line with previous practice before the House of Lords ruling.

The asbestos-related condition of pleural plaques was one such condition that the Act was intended to cover. Although it has no discernible effect on an individual’s health, pleural plaques are an abnormal change in the layers of tissue between the lungs and the inside of the rib cage, They are dense, irregularly-shaped, collagenous masses which can be more than 10cm across and up to 1cm thick and can fuse together into large sheets and solidify over time.
Those diagnosed with pleural plaques are liable to become alarmed and anxious for the future. Being diagnosed confirms that they have had significant asbestos exposure in the past, something that they may not have previously been aware of.  
It underlines that they are at a much higher risk of contracting lung cancer, mesothelioma or asbestosis and it may bring to mind the suffering and perhaps death of friends, colleagues and relatives from these serious asbestos-related diseases.

The challenge to the new Act was opposed by both Scottish Ministers and representatives of claimants. In his 151-page judgement, Lord Emslie decided certain issues in the favour of the insurers, but rejected the challenge in its three main arguments. While expressing some sympathy for their position, he dismissed the application on a number of grounds
He said that the  petitioners – as insurers – are not actually parties to any affected court proceedings and that the Act does not relevantly interfere with pending actions anyway and that the new legislation can in any event be justified on what the European Court of Human Rights at Strasbourg terms “compelling grounds of the general interest”.

            Asbestos exposure is linked to most cases of mesothelioma
      Scientists claim they have developed a more sensitive test for the
asbestos-related cancer mesothelioma.

      The cancer develops long after exposure to asbestos but patients
usually have a limited life expectancy.

      The test developed by a team at Oxford University looks at levels of a
protein closely linked to the cancer in fluid around the lungs.

      A UK lung expert welcomed the American Journal of Respiratory and
Critical Care Medicine study.
            A simple test which can exclude the diagnosis without resort to
more invasive methods would be welcomed

            Dr Paul Beckett, British Thoracic Society
      Mesothelioma is an invariably fatal tumour found in the surface of the
lung. While relatively rare, it is very difficult to treat because of its
location and because it does not seem to respond well to chemotherapy.

      The disease has been found in people with no history of exposure to
asbestos, but inhaling the dust released by the mineral when it is broken up
is known to be a key risk factor.

      It has particularly affected tradesmen such as joiners, plumbers and
electricians.

      Because it can take many decades for the disease to develop, experts
expect the number of cases in the UK to peak at around 2,200 by 2013.

      Laws preventing occupational exposure to asbestos are in place in the
developed world. There are no such restrictions in developing countries,
however.

      High levels

      The researchers focused on ways of distinguishing mesothelioma as a
cause of pleural effusion, the build-up of fluid in the pleural cavity
surrounding the lungs.

      There are many causes of this symptom, many of which are benign or
linked to other types of cancer but over 90% of people with mesothelioma
have the symptom.

      At the moment, doctors carry out pleural fluid cytology – a lab test
which looks for cancerous cells.

      However the Oxford team say this is not a very sensitive test.

      Team members used pleural fluid samples from over 200 patients who had
been referred to a specialist respiratory clinic.

      They then looked at levels of the protein meothelin – which is
released in high quantities in the pleural fluid of most patients with
mesothelioma.

      It was found that levels of the protein were almost six times higher
in patients with the cancer than in those with secondary lung cancers, and
10 times greater than those with benign conditions.

      Rapid diagnosis

      Dr Helen Davies, who worked on the research, said: “This study
suggests a way for clinicians to more readily identify cases of mesothelioma
from the start.”

      She added: “Because mesothelioma has a median survival time of 12
months, minimising the number of invasive procedures and tests patients
require is crucial to reduce morbidity and the time they need to spend in
hospital.