Law Weblog

Workers win against insurers over mesothelioma payout

The insurance in force when a worker contracted a lung disease will now have to pay out following a High Court decision today; not the one in force when he becomes ill.

This decision affected thousands of workers who became ill with the lung disease, mesothelioma which is caused by contact with asbestos.

Insurers tried to avoid paying compensation under the policies they sold to employers because the disease can take 25-40 years to take hold.

The insurers argued that the worker may have worked for several employers and so it was common sense that the policy in force when the victim became ill was the one that should pay.  Many of the original employers no longer exist.

The test case followed from the death of Charles O’Farrell. His family sued Excess Insurance, which covered his former employer, Humphreys & Glasgow. Other test cases, all heard together, were Fern v BAI; Bates v BAI; Fleming v Independent; Akzo Nobel & Amec Plc v Excess Ins. Co; and MMI v Zurich & Adur DC & ors.

The full judgment is available on BAILII
See also BBC News 21.11.08

95% of violence victims do not seek compensation

In a damning indictment of ministers’ aim to prioritise victims of crime, it has been revealed that two thirds of victims are unaware that they were eligible for compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA).

  A report by the Commons Public Accounts Committee says that even where people do apply, they are hampered by a complex application form and suffer delays in receiving their money because of bureaucracy.

It is said that since MPs’ delivered a “withering verdict” eight years ago, the performance of the authority had deteriorated even further.

The MPs’ report, Compensating Victims of Violent Crime, criticises the Ministry of Justice for affording the agency a low priority despite its claims to put victims at the heart of the criminal justice system.

Times report here

Sir Mark Potter – and the Office for Judicial Complaints

Sir Mark Potter, head of the Family Division is facing trouble again. He wrote a reference for a barrister friend, who stood trial last year accused of perverting the course of justice. Bruce Hyman was sentenced to 12 months in jail for attempting to pervert the course of justice, the first barrister in history to do so.
Potter had intended the reference to be given to the sentencing judge. Judges are allowed to give character references, but the complaint against Potter is that it was written on his official stationery and bore his name and title.
A previous complaint last year was dismissed, the OJC decided there had been no breach of guidelines, Potter gave the reference in his personal, not judicial, capacity.
But it has now emerged that the OJC was not aware of the original character reference written on Potter’s official stationery.

News story here

Man impersonates barrister - new offence

A bogus lawyer, Ian Clegg aged 32 is believed to be the first person to be convicted of impersonating a barrister, a new offence under section 181 of the Legal Services Act 2007,

The offence carries a maximum jail term of one year, he was remanded for reports and will be sentenced later.
Press story here.

The internet and the juror - Lord Judge

The internet generation which is not used to listening for long periods may be unsuitable as jurors said the Lord Chief Justice in a speech at University of Hertfordshire, this week.

Nowadays, judges at the outset of the trial among other directions to the jury direct them not to look at the internet in connection with the trial.

Copy of Lord Judge’s speech here

Happy Birthday - Human Rights Act

The Human Rights Act is 10 years old today; it has cost to the taxpayer up to £100 million.
Nick Herbert, the Tories’ Shadow Justice Secretary, said:

“Labour’s Human Rights Act has fuelled a decade of rights without responsibilities, allowing a culture of grievance to devalue the concept of fundamental rights, yet failing to protect important liberties.

A Ministry of Justice spokesman said:

“The Human Rights Act secures a fair balance between the interests of society and the protection of the rights of the individual. It protects all of us and is of particular importance to the most vulnerable in society such as people in the healthcare system and adults with learning disabilities.”

News item here.

No guidance to be given on DPP discretion on assisted suicide

Debbie Purd, the multiple sclerosis sufferer, failed in High Court bid to know how far her husband Omar Puente can go in helping her to take her own life.

Her attempt to obtain advance guidance from the Director of Public Prosecutions on how he would exercise his discretion in such cases was comprehensively dismissed yesterday, despite being argued by the leading human rights lawyer David Pannick QC.
The decision is to be appealed.

Full report, here.

Involuntary “sexsomnia” - sleep sex - can be a valid legal defence - in Canada

On 17 October 2009, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that involuntary “sexsomnia” - sleep sex - can be a valid legal defence. This is the first time a superior court, any where in the world has ruled on the defence, although many defendants have been acquitted at trial.

The incident took place in 2003, when the victim woke up at a late-night party and found the defendant on top of her.

The appeal court ordered a new trial only to decide whether the defendant, Mr. Luedecke should be acquitted outright, or be found not criminally responsible on account of a mental disorder.

News report here

Metric martyr trader convicted despite EU advice

Magistrates convicted market trader Janet Devers, 64 on 8 October 2008 of eight offences under the Weights and Measures Act because she used imperial scales without an official stamp and sold produce by the bowl, despite the EU saying to do so should not be an offence.

She was ordered to pay almost £5,000 in costs and although being given a conditional discharge, now has a criminal record.

In September 2007, Gunther Verheugen, European Commission vice president for enterprise and industry, said Brussels never intended to criminalise those who sold in pounds and ounces; this is the first UK prosecution since the EU ruling.

News report here

Balfour Beatty: bribery deal, is this the start of plea bargains?

A deal that could lead to similar settlements follows Balfour Beatty’s agrement to admit “payment irregularities” and pay a £2.25m penalty in exchange for no criminal charges being brought against them.
The deal follows a Serious Fraud Squad investigation. The deal is “groundbreaking”, the suggestion is that it could open the way for other settlements by companies facing foreign corruption charges.
News report here