The shock and upset of being diagnosed with cancer can result in the investigation as to the cause of the cancer being overlooked whilst treatment is pursued. 

However, it has been recognised for decades that certain types of cancer are caused by exposure to harmful substances.  Compensation and state benefits may be available to those sufferers who have had exposure either through their occupation or from the environment.  Below are details of those benefits currently recognised by the Department for Work and Pensions as being occupationally induced.

By way of example, bladder cancers can be caused by exposure to dyestuffs or beta napthylamine used in many industries.  Heavy exposure to asbestos dust can cause lung cancer but so can exposure to silica.  Silica dust is produced by people working as sand blasters or stone masons. 

Proving what caused the cancer can be a difficult process but with the assistance of a dedicated specialist solicitor, choosing the best medical and occupational experts and barrister can make all the difference. 

At John Pickering and Partners LLP, we are specialist in industrial disease claims and can help you to reach a successful conclusion.

Often in industrial disease claims there can be several causes of the disease.  In a recent Court of Appeal claim of John Cookson, it was decided that Mr Cookson’s bladder cancer was due to his work with dyestuffs.  His employers admitted that he had had exposure but argued that smoking was the reason for him developing bladder cancer.  Smoking is a cause of bladder cancer.  In Mr Cookson’s case, the Judges in the Court of Appeal held that the dyestuffs had made a real difference to him developing bladder cancer and he recovered compensation. 

John Pickering and Partners LLP have extensive knowledge and understanding of the issues involved in industrial disease claims and can assist sufferers and their families with a claim for Benefits and a claim against their employer or exposer. 

Three of our recent cases in respect of bladder cancer, silicosis and lung cancer follow:

Bladder cancer:

“Mr S worked for Boots as an assistant Chemist between 1946 and 1953. During this employment he had to prepare and use quantities of pure beta napthylamine for the Chester Beatty Research Institute without any safeguards being taken. Beta napthylamine is known to cause cancer and in 1998 he developed a bladder cancer. Mr S instructed us to bring a claim for compensation against Boots. A court action was started. Boots said that Mr S’s bladder cancer was caused by his smoking and not exposure to beta napthylamine. The case settled shortly before trial for the sum of £39,780.86.”

Silicosis:

“Mr B worked as a stonemason and stone dresser for 2 companies between 1979 and 1984. He used a hammer and chisel and a stihl saw to cut up Yorkshire stone. The stone contained large amounts of silica which he inhaled and he went on to develop severe silicosis which contributed to his death.

We were instructed by Mrs B's widow to bring a claim for compensation against the 2 employers that had exposed Mr B to silica dust. Both companies denied liability. The case was compromised for £40,000 shortly before trial.”

Lung cancer:

My client has given me permission to write an article about his case because he realises that it has significance for the others with asbestos lung cancer. However, he wishes to retain his anonymity bearing in mind the level of compensation that he received. Compensation is never sufficient in asbestos disease cases because every client would prefer to have their health back. However, in this case we turned a very difficult case into a success, settling the day before trial. My client is also still alive almost 5 years on from diagnosis.

Our client worked in power stations from 1967 until he retired when he developed lung cancer in 2002.

In the 1960's/1970's and part of the 1980's he had exposure to asbestos dust when working as a labourer and burner and plater, he worked for a number of companies of which we pursued 7 companies for compensation.

Initially, when my client was diagnosed with lung cancer, the treating consultant did not realise that it might be to do with asbestos. It is a common problem that treating consultants don't recognise this. He was a smoker and he was told his lung cancer was due to smoking.
He underwent chemotherapy and radiotherapy which made him very poorly. When he was told he had lung cancer, he was told that they didn't know if he was going to survive. This was absolutely devastating news for him and his family since he was only 54 when he got the diagnosis.

Another of his work colleagues who had worked in the same conditions has also been diagnosed with lung cancer and another has died from it.

My client contacted a non-specialist firm of solicitors. They had his case for a couple of years but hadn't even issued Court proceedings or progressed his case. This is very concerning since it is often touch and go whether or not someone will survive lung cancer. My client was the main breadwinner and has one daughter still at college.

My client had lung cancer and had had heavy exposure to asbestos dust but there was no evidence that he was suffering from a condition called asbestosis. Medical opinion is divided as to whether or not cancer without asbestosis can be caused by asbestos. The main medical paper which deals with this is called The Helsinki Criteria. This was a paper studying causes of asbestos lung cancer. It came to the conclusion that where there was a high fibre count in lung tissue on post-mortem or where there is evidence of asbestosis or crucially, for this case where there had been very heavy exposure to asbestos dust, lung cancer was related to asbestos.

Many of those who have worked in Power Stations including my client are smokers or ex-smokers. It is certain that smoking can cause lung cancer as can asbestos. The effect of both smoking and being exposed to asbestos dust is not just additional but multiplicative which means that if you have both sources of exposure to lung cancer, you don't just double your risk but it more than doubled the risk by many times. There are people who aren't aware of this. A lot of people who have had very heavy exposure to asbestos dust have worked in manual trades and have smoked. I know that my client, had he known about the multiplicative effects, would have given up smoking straightaway.

My client instructed local solicitors who said that they had a specialism in industrial disease work but it became clear to him that they didn't know what to do with his case. He transferred his case to me and within 18 months his claim was settled for a substantial sum. My client is relatively well and the cancer has not reoccurred. This is a very rare happening for people with asbestos lung cancer. It means that with his compensation he can provide for him and his family and I hope that he will enjoy some of the money.”

Ruth Davies
John Pickering and Partners LLP
20 Clare Road
Halifax
HX1 2HX

E-mail: rd@johnpickering.co.uk
Tele: 01422 345535