'Cruel and inhumane' squabble puts asbestos victims in limbo

COMPENSATION claims to dying asbestos victims are being delayed by legal feuding between Australia's two asbestos manufacturers.

COMPENSATION claims to dying asbestos victims are being delayed by legal feuding between Australia's two asbestos manufacturers, James Hardie and CSR, over how they share financial liability.

In what is being described as a "cruel and inhumane playground fight" between the companies by lawyers representing the victims, the disputing organisations are impeding settlements by insisting sufferers prove which company's product they were exposed to decades earlier.

Up until last year, James Hardie - now known as Amaca - and CSR had an agreement to share the costs of compensation for victims uncertain about which of the two had manufactured the asbestos sheeting or roofing they were exposed to.

The arrangement was based roughly on the market share of the companies at the time and meant such cases, which make up about half of all compensation claims, could be settled quickly before the plaintiffs died.

But the decade-long agreement has since been terminated and Slater and Gordon, which represents the bulk of asbestos litigation cases, says this fighting between the companies about who was liable for how much is delaying cases for months when some of their clients only have as long to live.

"They just won't talk to each other and when someone has got six to eight months to live and they are beating their chest for six months over who pays what, it just should not be happening," said Steve Plunkett, the head of Slater and Gordon's asbestos litigation team.

"It's cruel, inhumane and these are corporate giants carrying on like kids in a school yard that has an effect on these poor people."

A spokesman for CSR denied any delays had occurred. "We continue to examine all claims on factual and legal merits as quickly as possible and attempt to resolve claims where we have a legal liability," said company spokesman Martin Cole.

However, Mr Plunkett said the companies were demanding plaintiffs prove the source of asbestos sheeting and roofing they were exposed to, in some cases many decades ago.

\ He said this was particularly onerous for what is known as "third-wave" asbestos disease sufferers such as housewives who washed their husband's clothes or builders who renovated houses, as they did not know the specific asbestos brand or the percentage breakdown of their contact with each brand.

"Now what they have taken to doing is saying, 'If you can't prove it was our particular product, why should we pay you?"' Mr Plunkett said. "If you were exposed to asbestos cement sheeting or roofing in Australia, it either came from James Hardie or the CSR subsidiary Wunderlich, and they are best placed to work out whose product was involved in a particular case."

Mr Plunkett said that some asbestos victims who had developed mesothelioma - which can take 30 or 40 years to take hold - had only months to live; there was no time for bickering between companies.

"If you are acting with someone with terminal cancer, you just want to resolve it in their lifetime so they have a chance to do something with the compensation," he said. "While James Hardie and CSR seek to blame each other, sick and dying asbestos victims hoping to settle their claims are being put through unbearable stress and suffering, even though employers' insurers are often willing to settle the matters."

Mr Plunkett said they had several cases that had gone through months of mediation and were now on the way to trial. Laurel Frank's father, Karl, is one claimant who faces extensive delays because of the dispute between the companies.

Ms Frank told The Australian her father was exposed to asbestos from the 1930s to the 70s as an electrician but his claim had not been settled because of the fighting between James Hardie and CSR.

Ms Frank said every attempt at mediation had failed because of the companies arguing over their share of liability. "There is no doubt about his exposure ... there were only two suppliers that made the asbestos building materials," she said. Her father, who is in his 80s, had been in decline since he was diagnosed with an asbestos-related illness 18 months ago, and now needed full-time oxygen. "It makes me very angry," she said of the delays in the mediation. "It just seems so petty. The big issues are not in dispute. We feel like saying, 'Just get on with it' and asking them 'Why are you doing this?"'

It was unclear last night whether the breakdown of the cost-sharing agreement would affect claimants only in Victoria or in all states.