header-logo header-logo

05 March 2010
Issue: 7407 / Categories: Legal News , Health & safety , Damages
printer mail-detail

Asbestos illness payments rise

Extra financial help for sufferers of mesothelioma and plural plaques
Mesothelioma sufferers are to be given an extra 40% of financial help, the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) has announced.

From April, lump sum payments made under the 2008 Mesothelioma Scheme will increase to the same level as those paid under the Pneumoconiosis etc (Workers’ Compensation) Act 1979. This means individuals who develop the disease from asbestos exposure outside the workplace will receive the same payment as those exposed at work. 

Sufferers currently receive a minimum payment of £8,197 from the Mesothelioma Scheme. This will rise to £11,678 in April. The maximum payment will rise from £52,772 to £75,176.

Families of sufferers will be given an increase of up to £5,000. The government will increase payment levels under the 1979 Act by a further 1.5%. About 6,000 claimants with pleural plaques who began claims before a House of Lords ruling on 17 October 2007 will be given one-off payments of £5,000. The Law Lords held that the existence of pleural plaques did not constitute actionable or compensatable damage. Previously, the courts had regarded plaques as compensatable.

Trade union law firm Thompsons Solicitors welcomed the DWP decision on mesothelioma but expressed disappointment at the decision not to restore compensation for people with pleural plaques.

Ian McFall, head of asbestos policy at Thompsons Solicitors said: “On behalf of our clients we are disappointed the government has decided not to overturn the House of Lords’ judgment although we recognise that at least some people with pleural plaques will get something.”

The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers welcomed the increased payments for mesothelioma sufferers and their dependants, but said the decision on pleural plaques was “a disappointing end to a long, drawn out consultation process”. Mesothelioma is a fatal cancer of the lining of the lungs or abdomen associated with exposure to asbestos.

Issue: 7407 / Categories: Legal News , Health & safety , Damages
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll