Document ba1RRdx05y9vqK02qZ47wBax1

l) WNtttoom miM hi operetta around Idefc oeeordtnft,oone, H to tho naaM'iworettodutfetef dtaator, on Auatratta Bhopaf uddenly, finally,'the legal log Jim How many of their families and other S begin to move: Twenty-two yean townspeople trill be affected is unknow* after closure of the Wjuenooni able. But some who were children in Wit* mine in Western Australis-- tenoom, r.*>w nearing middle age, are when lethal lung-lacerating blue asbeksntoswn to have contracted mesothelioma. fiber hid been mined for a quarter of a Workers in downstream industries--those century---iwo massive compensation pay who stripped 'he lethal blue material and $370,000 damages to Asbestosis Suffer. Colin Watson. 52, who worked in 1959; the state-owned Fort Sampson facility tlu serviced the Wittenoom mine. Watson ha been a clerk and lumper, lugging and tor ing bags ofasbestos for shipment to Pertf He sued the state government. The judg outs were awarded last week to former worked with it in factories and on building found that the government should hav mineworkers suffering crippling lung afflictions. Both eases were important firsts. But 245 Suits are still in the works txd hwn4f*dt. pocetbly UiaummU, y< to be launched. PolentiaDy, more than a tuition dollars in compensation payments sites--are also at risk. Thus, the 245 cases in the legal pipeline may ha only ih* titn r Ium*,, Ik* *ju vuuUnwi wn itutf mxt century. Suinc commentators haw labeled wu tenoom the nation's wont industrial been aware of the risk from asbestos dust The Victorian judgment represents j iii Auiitlii jaw. The awarn exemplary damages--in effect, a financia pufrithuwut upuu the wmpany aiMlvlona to the sure awarded to the victim in com f could be at stake; . disaster, an Australian Bhopal--a refer pensation--is a first in Australia. The sgk Shams in CSR Ltd., the parent of the ence to the 1984 Indian chemical leaks wilt appeal. The exemplary damages ap company that operated the Wittenoom disaster that claimed 2,500 lives. . peal, many experts believe, may end up ir. mine, trembled momentarily last week. The litigants argue that the mine ope the High Court because of its widespread But CSR sulwartly maintained that it was rators were almost recklessly indifferent to implications for general compensation not financially involved. Western Aust the hazards of asbestos dust. They point taw. ralia's State Government Insurance Com* to widespread medical knowledge then The WA case also broke new ground. mission (SGtc) was in the firing line, CSR existing about the link between asbestos It was the first indicator of how the state's insisted, because it had insured the mine and lung disease. Key mine executives judiciary would assess asbestos disease operator. CSR's 100%-owned subsidiary admitted being aware of the link. Yet claims. Significantly, Justice William Pid- Australian Blue Asbestos, now Midalco worsening dust conditions at the mine gcon chose to make the biggest-ever finan Ply.Ud. were the subject of repeated adverse re* cial award for a case or simple asbestosis. But the SGfC was weaving frantically. It ports by inspectors of the WA Department The decision, if not overturned on appeal, claimed thejudgment should be paid from of Mines through the '50s and early '60s. also stands as a precedent for future as a statutory industrial diseases fund levied The company and its insurer have bestos disease cases. (The Victorian judg under WA workers* compensation law nevertheless fought tenaciously to contain ment, coming from a jury rather than a upon the whole of the state's mining indu* the damage. Ana the legal mill has ground judge, does not.) suy. The WA Chamber of Mines loudly with frustrating slowness for the growing Moreover, in holding that the state rejected this Suggestion- Clearly, the list of asbestos litigants. In one case, the government should have had knowledge mining industry was not about to be litigant was ruled not to be suffering from of the link between disease and asb *tos. saddled with Wittenoom's tjagk legacy an asbestos*re!ated disease. In another, the Pidgeon potentially widened the door to without a fight. fatally ill ex-worker died on the eve of his asbestos litigation against a number of More than 6,000 workers passed day In court. The backlog ofcases pending public instrumentalities, Power, water and through the Wittenoom mine ana mill. in the hard-pressed WA Supreme Court drainage authorities and railways, for , Some 20,000 men, women and children mounted. Then, last week, the two crucial example, were all significant users of as lived at various times in Wittenoom town* judgments*. bestos. Further, if state governments ship, where blue asbestos tailings literally A Victorian Supreme Court jury awtrd* should have known about the health paved the roads and playing fields. One ed $582,000 to a mcsotheliomu-stricken hazards, so presumably should Federal epidemiological survey, disputed by the businessman, Klaus Rabcnalt, 52. The Government asbestos users. This might company, suggests that one in six Wit* sum comprised compensatory neglig* mak,e litigation targets of the defense tenoom workers can expect to die of as* ence damages *of $426,000 and exemplary forces and such bodies as the old PMC hcstos-related diseases, either the creeping damages of $257,000, Rabcnalt had (now split into Telecom and Australia breathlessness of asbestosis or lung cun* wotked in the Wittenoom mill for six Post). vet- chiefly mesothelioma, a malignant months in I960. He now has about six James Hardie Industries and Mineral tumor that has been described as feeling months to live. Commodities are two public companies tike having cement poured into the lungs. A WA Supreme Court judge awarded already deeply mired in asbestos damages 4K TIME. JUNf.6, IVKJt I Atworkamong Wlttofvoem'a Mu* Oaath, with Klaus Rabenalt and grantfdaughter.centantha horror may eofitfnutwsti Into neat century claims. James Hardie owned and operated the opencut Baryutgil white asbestos mine in northern New South Wales from 1942 to 1976. But Htrdie's biggest association with asbestos was in manufacturing. A number of iu building products were once strengthened with asbestos, though the fiber was phased out of all Hardie pro* ducts between 1981 and 1986. Last year, James Hardie was defending ten common* law cases for ashestosis, and "there are probably 15 cases at the moment because of the interest in asbestos,** according to Ian Kelso, a company spokesman. inert! Commodities, which, as Woodsreef Mines, bought the Baryulgil mine in 1976 and closed it three years later, also owned and operated a white asbestos mine and mill at Barraba in northern NSW, which closed in 1983. Mineral Commodi ties Managing Director David Barwick says no cases against the company have arisen out of the Barraba operation, and claims that while a number ofactions have been launched by workers at (he Baryulgil mine, none so far has succeeded. Many companies (hat used asbestos in their processes or products will almost cer tainly be seeking reports from their litiga tion departments on the implications of last week's judgments. Perth Lawyer John Cordon, or the firm Slater and Cordon, solicitor for Watson, one of the successful litigants, says; "Industry can take no com fort from the Pidgeon decision. If a peri pheral .body like a state port authority should have known the risk from asbestos and taken steps to prevent it, then surely so should miners and manufacturers.** Whoever loses from the asbestos tra gedy, the legal profession will not. As bestos litigation promises to be a more lucrative industry than asbestos mining ever was. Victorian-based Slater and Cordun is one legal firm that has re- AA.>.'*4 lh | krir4 tk* I successful barristers in both the Rabenalt I and WwftnrN ***** *t>A a*** TIMfUUNRMttl experience in small Victorian asbestos- related industrial eases. It then decided that the field was being largely neglected in WA, where the majority of asbestos cases were being listed, and opened offices in Penh last year. For the giant CSR company, how ever, last week's legal developments are merely one phase in a war that is still far from lost. Executive Director Bid Bennett issued a statement stressing that the Victo rian decision did not constitute prece dent, and underlining that (he award was against Midateo, not CSR; indeed, he said, the full oourt of the Victorian Supreme Court had earlier rejected a bid by Rabe- nalt's lawyers to enjoin the parent com pany in the action. Bennett added that "we all feel deep compassion for Mr Rabenalt and others suffering from asbestos related disease.'* But CSR had already demonstrated that compassion by contributing about $2 mil lion to the Wittenoom Trust--established lo aid people associated with the mine- even though it had been under no legal obligation lo do so. Bennett's statement went to the core ofCSR's Wittenoom sur vival strategy. Whatever a subsidiary com pany might or might not have done, CSR maintains, any liability for those actions is eonfined to it and it alone. "A parent com pany is nOt liable for the actions of subsi diary, even a 100%-owned subsidiary," CSR Public Relations Chief Keith Roberts said bluntly last wock. *'We deny any res ponsibility in regard to Wittenoom." In effect, therefore, CSR is claiming that Wit tenoom litigants must confine their atten tions to an operationally inactive subsid iary, which, while Insureo, is itself virtually bereft of assets. (CSR*s latest accounts state that the group's total investment in Midalco Pty. Ltd. is a mere $98,000.) The litigants, however, maintain their sights on the prosperous parent. Midalco (or ABS as it then w$) opened the Wiitcn**m mIa* if* IOO --<1 *j***4 i* **--*t <* closure 22 year* ago. But the plaintiffs point lA n*k -- tl*A jn*AI0*. _ ; ment links between parent and subsidiary, and CSR's central rote in negotiating sates of Wittenoom asbestos, as evidence of parental complicity io the mine's now well- documented shortcomings. The Victorian decision gives CSR some respite from these attacks in that the company avoided being enjoined in the Rabenalt action. But that possibility is still open (n other Wittenoom cases now under way in WA, where the court has reserved decision on whether CSR' can be jointly sued with its subsidiary. Last week, the sharemarket voted its belief that CSR would continue to hold at arm's length the consequences of^unplea- sent events more than a quarter century ago In the faraway folds or the Kimberley plateau. CSR shares blipped 8 down to $3.72 on Tuesday in a nervous kneeierk to the Rabenalt decision. But by the dose of trade on Friday the company's price bad rebounded to $4.12--a high for the year. For thousands of ordinary Australians who once happened to work or live at Wit tenoom, the consequences of the nation's most disastrous mining venture are less easily dismissed. Those who do not join the toil of the dead and disabled will spend the rest of their lives with mounting un ease. Families already have been deci mated. Wiitenoom's week in the news coin cided with moves by the Australian Law Reform Commission to reactivate the issue of class actions in Australia. These would enable one person to take court action on behalfofothers. Overseas exam ples include the Daikon shield contracep tive case and the Zeebrugge ferry disaster damages action. Business, in particular, strongly op poses class actions, claiming they would be a further costly and unwarranted trough for (he legal community to feed at. But growing public awareness of Wittenoom and the sluggish response to it by an over- UJW 1*1*1 !* wMk l**t momentum to the Law Reform Commis- ___ _____ -- 49 t I. 02 News Release i U3:milO noi COITOCtly l waived pIlr^M tlptno (02) aw 0774 Outer ortQjirios: Keith Roberts Corporati trid InvsJtlor Rei|t*oru Telephorte 02 235 8W6 (otfir) 02 4671513 (homo) fftttlmlio 02 2358446 () Of i_v./ /*/</ YUTTBNOOM INSURANCE C5R was suprieofl and diumayod to learn through the SGIC's press release.of the SGIC's views on iuo insurance cover of Midalco for asbeatos-related dieaas. Midalco and the SGie agreed in 1903 on the handling of claims by employees consequent upon their exposure to asbostoa while working at Wltte-noom. This agreement was confirmed by uf- Frank Michell, managing director of SGIC, during a meeting in Perth as recently as 25 August 1988. CSR believes the SGIC's action* are in breach of the 1983 agreement between the SGIC and Midalco and of Its obligations under the insurance policy. Regrettably if the SGIC pursues the course of action foreshadowed in its press release Midalco will have no alternative but to seek a declaration in the court that the SGIC honour its commitments under the 1983 agreement and the insurance policy. Acting in good faith and in accordance with the 1983 agreement, Midalco has initiated settlement discuoseions in relation to claims brought by people employed at VJittenoom prior to 31 December 1958. It is most unfortunate that should the SGIC proceed with the actions foreshadowed in its press release there will inevitably be delays in the resolution of claims by people employed after i January 1959# the date from which Midalco has unlimited cover with the SGIC* CSR and Midalco will be seeking to meet with the SGIC and the Western Australian Government to find a solution which would allow-the speedy resolution of the post-1959 claims. Enquiriesi, Mr Keith Roberta Chief manager Corporate a Investor Relations 21 ^Septemberr^. 9 a 8 [Kent yUlfa /***' Jti aJLdt- : u* /!&&**t \Aii) fb^ArK /fa/. \/. /#yy jz; fyf ('/?&?) 2.:/6&3 Of&?) /Itc&e&n^/ */ /jheAia/ 2.'S0l?{/9&p) /faint. . /fa*/ J//hiXutJ 2:$?//%/) fat/b/ojy / 327 Oj 6?) /faJJ/kvfa/. ^ 11076772) f/to/&4. / ft ?6?7-/) '* fYUAYs&e*#s&/' /: ?2 6.973) IfaU&i /ifa//^^^t/.y9.,9Sz.6973) /U/Y/^4i/ 2:626/777) 3a6u///^A^ z -' /K'^OrTr) s&Y/j 33 &?pf) Stvt^o , Aa/J/Pu^o/ 2.Mrrr&rzr) '/fW- " fi*UA.Att*/. 2:?St(7?-7i) ' ' *i/J.&ass. i-w f^7?) /htsn*C AujyA^//! >/ /' 21 SEPTEMBER, 1988 STATE GOVERNMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION 9(50 Atrium *70 It. Woe*. P#rtlvWA6000 fetophorw. 327 7277 e.PO.kwM$29.6001 Telex: SCIOWA AA94409 Telegrams: "WASO" Penn Foc$irnile; (09) 327 7346 The State Government Insurance Commission said today the insurance policy for CSR subsidiary, Midalco Pty Ltd was eonaidered to be inoperative. Midalco Pty Ltd was the operator of the Wittenoom asbestos mine. Managing Director, Mr Frank Michel1, said reeent court action in Western Australia had placed direct responsibility on CSR for the Wittenoom nine. It was also apparent from yesterday's court decision in victoria that Midalco had been aware of the dangers associated with asbestos dust, that it had failed to take reasonable precautions to protect employees and had failed to fully disclose the dangerous nature of the Wittenoom mine operations to the Insurance Commission. In dismissing the appeal against exemplary damages in the Victorian case the Full Court of Victoria said a strong case was made supporting a finding of recklessness, indeed of continuing, conscious and contumelious disregard by Midalco for the employee's right to be free from risk of Injury or disease. Mr Michell said even though the policy was considered inoperative this should not affect the speedy settlement of claims which have been or are made against CSR/Midalco. Media Contacti Margaret Sullivan Manager# Public Relations 3277318 OR 3277277