- Claimant succeeds on limitation and causation in asbestosis claim (Balls v Reeve)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Causation and the Helsinki criteria
- Case details
Personal Injury analysis: The High Court found in favour of the claimant in his asbestosis claim on (1) primary limitation based on date of knowledge and (2) causation. Notably there was no expert evidence from an occupational hygienist but that was not a barrier to causation given the factual evidence of exposure and the medical expert evidence. The date of knowledge was the date of diagnosis, not prior references to asbestos related disease in the medical records. If primary limitation had expired, the court would have exercised discretion under section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980) in the claimant’s favour. Causation was established without the need for expert occupational hygienist evidence on the facts. Written by Megan Griffiths, barrister at 12 King’s Bench Walk.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial