Six-figure settlement and justice secured for widow of former Chipping Norton Tweed Mill worker.

Mr. H, a fit and active 72-year-old, was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma following an emergency hospital admission due to a collapsed lung. This diagnosis was a shock to him and his wife, especially as it became clear that his illness was caused by asbestos exposure during his career. Mr. H had encountered asbestos while working at a Tweed Mill in Chipping Norton (the first defendant) and later at a boarding school in Oxfordshire (the second defendant) where he performed maintenance work.

The second defendant strongly disputed liability, presenting several witness statements. Our team also gathered witness statements from former colleagues to support his claim.

After proceedings were commenced, judgment was entered against the first defendant, which was ordered to pay interim damages of £50,000. Evidence on commission was also ordered in relation to his work with the second defendant, where Mr H gave evidence by way of deposition.

This was a complex case in many ways. Following the issue of proceedings and obtaining judgment for Mr H, the first defendant argued that there was a paymaster shortfall and they would not be able to meet the judgment damages. We investigated and made a court application to enforce the judgment and for the defendant to pay the shortfall in insurance cover directly. We succeeded in that application and the first defendant was ordered to pay the judgment interim damages in full, partly from historic insurance cover and partly themselves.

Tragically, Mr. H's condition worsened, and he passed away before the case concluded. The Coroner confirmed that his death was due to mesothelioma resulting from industrial disease. His widow continued the case on his behalf.

As well as the mesothelioma, Mr H had a complex medical history. It was therefore necessary to obtain further expert evidence from other medical specialists, in addition to the oncology and respiratory evidence.

The matter went to a further court hearing where all of this was considered, as well as the fact that the pleadings would need to be amended to reflect the fact that Mr H’s widow had taken over the case as the claimant, and that time would be needed to obtain Letters of Administration. The claim was stayed against the second defendant and the matter progressed against the first defendant for 100% of the damages.

The defendant made an offer which was very low and we advised the claimant to reject it. Additional evidence was obtained to demonstrate the impact of Mr. H’s death on his widow, particularly the loss of his assistance with household and maintenance tasks. Following negotiations, the case settled for a significant six-figure sum, which included compensation for his widow's dependency on his income and services, as well as the substantial time she had spent caring for him during his illness.

Before Mr H passed away, Mr. H had expressed his desire to secure justice for what remaining time had been robbed from him. However, his sole concern was how his wife would cope financially after he had passed away. Now, Mrs H has security for the future in line with Mr H’s wishes.