(First Division) The insurance companies sought judicial review of the 2009 Act which lay them open, as employers liability insurers, to substantial historic claims for asymptotic neural plaque injuries.
Held: The companies’ appeal failed. The Division allowed the reclaiming motion to the extent of repelling the answers for the third to tenth respondents on the ground that they did not have a title and interest to be convened as respondents under rule 58.8(2), but quoad ultra refused the reclaiming motion itself.
Lord President, Lord Eassie, Lord Hardie
2011 SLT 439, 2011 GWD 14-325, [2011] CSIH 31, 2011 SCLR 305, [2011] ScotCS CSIH – 31
Bailii
Damages (Asbestos-related Conditions) (Scotland) Act 2009
Scotland
Citing:
At Outer House – Axa General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others SCS 8-Jan-2010
axaReSCS201
The claimant sought to challenge the validity of the 2009 Act by judicial review. The Act would make their insured and themselves liable to very substantial unanticipated claims for damages for pleural plaques which would not previousl or otherwise . .
Cited by:
At Inner House – AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others SC 12-Oct-2011
Standing to Claim under A1P1 ECHR
The appellants had written employers’ liability insurance policies. They appealed against rejection of their challenge to the 2009 Act which provided that asymptomatic pleural plaques, pleural thickening and asbestosis should constitute actionable . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 July 2021; Ref: scu.432877
