Court rules on asbestos exposure

Safety campaigners have welcomed a landmark ruling over “low level” exposures to a cancer-causing substance, such as asbestos.

The Supreme Court ruled that the families of Dianne Willmore and Enid Costello, who both died of mesothelioma, an asbestos-related cancer, having been exposed to small doses of asbestos dust, could keep compensation awarded by the courts for their loved ones’ deaths. Willmore was exposed while a pupil at school and Costello during her work.

Employers and their insurers, along with a local authority, tried to establish a threshold of exposure which could rule out hundreds of potential claims for mesothelioma where there was low level exposure to asbestos. However, the Supreme Court has ruled that even a slight amount of exposure can result in an employer being liable, unless they can show they took appropriate steps to remove the dust.

Tony Whitston, chair of Asbestos Victims Support Group Forum, said: “There is no known safe level of exposure to asbestos.

“Arguments for a ‘safe’ threshold are everything to do with denying liability for compensation and nothing to do with protecting people.”

Unions in education hope that the ruling will act as a wake up call for employers and local authorities to improve asbestos management in schools.

Christine Blower, general secretary of the NUT teaching union, said: “It has been known for many years that children are more vulnerable than adults to the effects of asbestos exposure, even at low levels.”