Representation:

1. the principle of liability established in Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd and anor HL 2002 UKHL 22 that allowed an employee who had developed mesothelioma after working for various employers to claim compensation even though he could not demonstrate which employer he was working for when he inhaled the particular fibres which led to the disease, was not altered by the fact that the employee had been self-employed in an occupation which also involved exposure to asbestos; and

2. where a number of employers were found to be liable under the the principle of Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd and anor HL 2002 (above) then the liability should be apportioned between the various employers responsible for wrongful exposure according to their relative degree of contribution to the chance of the person contracting the disease (which in practice will normally mean according to how long the exposure to asbestos lasted).

editor's note:
July 2006. The government has introduced new legislation to "overrule" the House of Lords decision in this case. In a situation such as that in this case each of the various employers and/or their insurers is made 100% jointly and severally liable. Appropriate changes were made to the then current Compensation Bill - see notes at Acts of Parliament etc/Compensation Act 2006 backed up by Compensation Act 2006 (Contribution for Mesothelioma Claims) Regulations 2006, SI 2006/3259. The legislation is retrospective to 3rd May 2006, the date of the decision in this case and provides the right for the parties to seek variation of any settlement or determination made before that date (see 2006/07/17 - DCA Press Release "Government help for victims of Mesothelioma"). It will of course be open for an employer who had been unjustly forced to pay "too much" to seek contribution from the other various employers if they are still in existence.

For relevant general notes see Health and Safety at work/asbestos and/or Acts of Parliament etc/Compensation Act 2006