Pleural plaque sufferers will not be compensated
A recent House of Lords decision has denied compensation to many thousands of workers negligently exposed to asbestos by their former employers and now diagnosed with the condition known a pleural plaque.
Even those suffering a real psychiatric disorder ( as opposed to just worry ) as a result of the diagnosis will not be entitled to compensation. This decision will be likely to save the insurance industry millions of pounds.
Some regret and sympathy was expressed in the House of Lords that the claimants do not now have any remedy. Some of the Law Lords wondered whether a claim for breach of contract, which had not been put to them by the claimants’ legal team, could be a basis for a successful claim. The difficulty with that is that the level of compensation may only be nominal.
Apparently there is support among some Scottish MPs for a change in the law to reverse the decision by legislation, and MPs in Westminster are being lobbied for the same purpose.
In reaching this decision the House of Lords have reversed a series of cases going back to the 1980s where substantial sums were awarded to those diagnosed with asbestos related pleural plaque.
The decision is based largely on the proposition that although pleural plaque amounts to an injury, it is an injury without symptoms or physical consequences and therefore not worthy of compensation.
As pleural plaque only very rarely cause any symptoms and as the plaques are said not lead directly to any of the more serious asbestos-related illnesses it was not felt by the Law Lords that there was any real damage.
The condition is caused when asbestos fibres inhaled perhaps many years ago slowly work their way through the lungs to the outside in the pleural cavity. So there is permanent penetration of the lung tissue by the fibres. Once there they form plaques. They can often cover large areas of the lung. After a few years they often calcify. Inevitably anxiety about the possibility of a fatal condition developing at a later stage often accompanies a diagnosis. Sometimes this anxiety can be disabling.
It must still be strongly arguable that the process of developing the plaques is an unpleasant and unwelcome insult to the body justifying an award of compensation, and one hopes that the decision can be reversed by Parliament.
