Material contribution to risk CASES
Home » Material contribution to risk
A worker contracted dermatitis after exposure to brick dust. His employer provided no on-site washing facilities, prolonging skin contact with the dust. As the employer's breach of duty materially increased the risk of injury, they were held liable, despite causation not being definitively proven. Facts The pursuer, Mr James McGhee, was employed by the defenders, the National Coal Board, to clean out brick kilns. This work exposed him to hot, abrasive brick dust. The nature of the work caused him to sweat, making the dust adhere to his skin. The defenders did not provide any washing or shower facilities at
Claimants contracted mesothelioma after negligent asbestos exposure by multiple employers. Being unable to prove which exposure was the specific cause, they sued. The House of Lords held that claimants could succeed by proving a defendant's negligence materially increased their risk. Facts This case involved two conjoined appeals brought by the dependants of workers who had died from mesothelioma, a fatal lung cancer caused by exposure to asbestos dust. In both cases, the deceased had been negligently exposed to asbestos by more than one employer during their working lives. Mesothelioma may be caused by a single asbestos fibre, or a few
An employee developed mesothelioma from asbestos exposure by multiple employers, one of whom was insolvent. The House of Lords held that solvent employers were not jointly and severally liable but only for their proportionate share of the risk created. Facts The claimant, Mr Barker, died from mesothelioma, a cancer caused by exposure to asbestos. He had been exposed to asbestos during three distinct periods in his working life. He worked for a company for over eight years, which later became insolvent. He was then self-employed for a period, during which he was also exposed. Finally, he worked for the defendant,
