Perhaps worth noting, however, that pleural plaque victims in England  

& Wales are to receive ex gratia payments of £5,000 each from  

government, as sums representing the amount of damages they would have  

got had the Johnston/Rothwell cases been decided otherwise by the  

House of Lords.

Jack Straw's full statement has the following passage:

"On the basis of medical evidence received during the course of this  

review, including authoritative reports from the Chief Medical Officer  

and the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council, we are unable to  

conclude that the Law Lords’ decision should be overturned at this  

time or that an open-ended no-fault compensation scheme should be set  

up. While the current medical evidence is clear that pleural plaques  

are a marker of exposure to asbestos, and that exposure to asbestos  

significantly increases the risk of asbestos-related disease, any  

increased risk of a person with pleural plaques developing an  

asbestos-related disease arises because of that person’s exposure to  

asbestos rather than because of the plaques themselves."

This may have interesting repercussions in the context of the judicial  

review of the Scottish legislation on this subject currently on-going  

in the Court of Session (first instance decision upholding the Act as  

within the legislative powers of the Scottish Parliament available  

here - http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/2010CSOH02.html).  I  

understand that the appeal in this case will be heard in July and has  

been put down for eight days in court.

Hector

--

Hector L MacQueen

Professor of Private Law

Edinburgh Law School

University of Edinburgh

Edinburgh EH8 9YL

UK

Tel: (0)131-650-2060; Fax: (0)131-662-6317

Quoting James Lee <j.s.f.lee@bham.ac.uk>:

> Dear Colleagues,

>

> With thanks to Jonathan Morgan for drawing my attention to it,  

> colleagues may be interested to see that the Ministry of Justice  

> here in England has finally released its conclusion on the  

> consultation (which closed in late 2008) into whether to intervene  

> to reverse the 2007 decision of the House of Lords ([2007] UKHL 39)  

> that pleural plaques should not be actionable -  

> http://www.justice.gov.uk/news/announcement250210a.htm:

>

> "On the basis of medical evidence received during the course of this  

>  review, including authoritative reports from the Chief Medical  

> Officer and the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council, we are unable  

> to conclude that the Law Lords' decision should be overturned at  

> this time or that an open-ended no-fault compensation scheme should  

> be set up. While the current medical evidence is clear that pleural  

> plaques are a marker of exposure to asbestos, and that exposure to  

> asbestos significantly increases the risk of asbestos-related  

> disease, any increased risk of a person with pleural plaques  

> developing an asbestos-related disease arises because of that  

> person's exposure to asbestos rather than because of the plaques  

> themselves. However, if new medical or other significant evidence  

> were to emerge, the government would obviously reassess the  

> situation."

>

> The Government has therefore decided against legislation, which  

> would have aligned English law with the response to the decision in  

> Scotland (subject to a Private Member's Bill which is unlikely to  

> pass without Government support before the election). Although one  

> must of course sympathise with the tragic predicament of claimants,  

> it would have been difficult to introduce such reforms in a manner  

> coherent with the rest of the law on damage in tort.

>

> Best wishes,

>

> James

>

> --

> James Lee

> Lecturer

> Director of the LLB Programme

> Birmingham Law School

> University of Birmingham

> Edgbaston

> Birmingham

> B15 2TT, United Kingdom

>

> Tel: +44 (0)121 414 3629

> E-mail: j.s.f.lee@bham.ac.uk

>

>

--

The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in

Scotland, with registration number SC005336.