Document MJN5zjp4OmYRraEJNGkQa119x

FILE NAME Colonial Sugar Refinery CSR DATE 1977 DOC CSR060 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION Minutes of Meeting RE Wittenoom Claims Fe a Wittenoom claims Meeting MGK RWH JFB FNL 8.9.77 JFB - Wittenoom asbestosis - many w claims - 26 deaths - all w liability with SGIO Maas - civil claim - died but widow to continue ~ backed by some group Robinson Cox and W.A. counsel have given apparently sound broad advice view of but need for advice from someone with political and social issues as well as legal and said After discussion with RGJ I saw Rothery I wasn't asking for his strategic advice but for his advice as to choice of a strategic adviser - but he wouldn't listen to last bit and kept telling me he would advise on strategy FNL not involved FNL JFB| No - regret should have - apology Don't think necessary - such matters within traditional responsibility of Industrial Department to exclusion of Legal Department and I understand question of responsib- ility was specifically considered and confirmed that it should be with Industrial Department Anyway Rothery is a tactician not a strategist Civil claims only covered for part of time of Wittenoom operation - need where uninsured to consider what also whether to position to take rely on limited liability of Midalco - negligence Claim would probably need to rely on negligence has opinion been obtained on whether case of Yes - definitely negligent - masks ineffective excessive dust levels - will give you file to read Will also ask you to consider who would be appropriate adviser on broad strategy RWH Any doubt about limited liability Midalco only worth 100,000 applying FNL JFB FNL I would think no doubt Can review legal issues and strategies but I think it will come back to the question whether CSR wants to avail itself of limited liability and tell claimants that Midalco has nothing after the first 100,000 Would like strategic advice anyway Perth advice seems sound but want a second view from outside CSR and want someone we can go to in Sydney Would like to see advice on negligence question one possibility is to contest issue even if no confidence of success Settle out of court and avoid publicity Won't necessarily avoid publicity - claimant or supporters can leak it a But not binding on question of negligence No but facts speak for themselves so far as other claimants are concerned JFB RWH . Would like of adviser you to review on strategy file and consider question Perhaps Santow FNL Will do but expect it will ultimately be a question of whether to use shelter of limited liability lawyers will throw that question back and _ MGK Also need to consider implications for Wunderlich exiting asbestos operations in N.S.W. and other States _ JFB Py Red herring - let's stick to Wittenoom