Document Z4vBg3ML6xpVBmLQ09okOeZYY

^ . * C` being related back to her childhood at Wittenoom where her 'y. father was working for A.B.A. Limited. So far CSR has not received any notice of claim but the matter has been drawn to the attention of Mr Leith in Perth by. the^VksfW-*Commissioner : of Public Health, Dr J C McNulty. It was decided to seek a legal opinion as to the Company's position in this esse and in possible future cases. Our Sydney solicitors. Sly and Russell, sought the advice of Messrs Robinson, Cox and Co. who are CSR's solicitors in Perth. , To summarise the advice given by both the W.A. solicitors and Sly and Russell: 1. CSR Limited itself has no legal liability at all} -* --. . 2. Kidalco *ty. Ltd. (which was formerly A.B.A. Limited and which is a wholly owned subsidiary of CSR Limited has a somewhat different legaj_ position as follows: a. It is possible that the claim would be statute .* barred,, due to the lapse of six years from the cause of action. However, the date upon which the cause of action arose would not be easy to determine or identify. It depends on when the disease started to manifest itself and not necessarily on the date, of inhalation of the dust or her death. b. jMidalco could argue that there is.no breach of the duty of care because we did not know at the time that Kese consequences were likely to result I from the inhalation of dust. This line of defence would be stronger in relation to inhalation of the dust prior to the publication of Dr Wagner's paper in 1960 which clearly established the connection between inhalation'of asbestos fibres and mesothelioma. Once this paper was published an applicant has a much better argument that the Company .should have known the consequences of inhalation of dust and that therefore the duty of care was clear. Apart from the above legal situation it is possible tnat CSR may wish to make a payment in the event of there being WV-04412 ft formal claim either from the woman concerned or from ner husband following her death. Such a payment could be made on an ex gratia basis without admission of liability and this would not affect our position in any similar future claim. . The. letter accompanying such a payment would need to be carefully worded end should be drafted by our solicitors. Recommendation As the legal position has now been clarified it is suggested that we should do nothing until some fofa of clai,m is made on the Company and that we should then simply consider -whether an'ex gratia payment should be made. . ^ ..................... Luno Cancer Death Advice was recently received from Perth of the death * from lung cancer of a former employee of A.B.a. Limited. This ! man, Mr Wielinga, worked at A.B.A. from duly l955_to January f. 1959 as. a,_leading haneLjsas*Rter* His death otv 2Y'Macch 1975 V was field to be due to carcinoma of the lung due to asbesfcoslli- cosis. . This is different to mesothelioma which is caocer^of the pleura. \ : r- ; The claim resulting from this man's death will be heard before the Workers Compensation Board on 19 May 1976. The claim will be dealt with by the W.A. State GVvefnment Insurance Office who were A.B.A. Llmited'.s insurers. .1 H Irving W 16 Feb 76 V.