Please select your state

We will show you information specific to your state.

Home | Booth -v- Amaca

Booth -v- Amaca

In an important case in relation to the issues of forseeability of risk of injury and warnings, the NSW Court of Appeal has found that James Hardie & Coy Pty Ltd should have known from at least 1953 of the dangers posed by asbestos to users in industry.

Mr John Booth instructed Turner Freeman partner Gerard McMahon following his diagnosis with mesothelioma. Mr Booth had been exposed to asbestos dust and fibre released from brake linings in the course of his employment as a brake mechanic.

Mr Booth succeded in proceedings in the Dust Diseases Tribunal of New South Wales and recovered damages in the sum of $326,000.

James Hardie (now known as Amaca) and its brake lining subsisary appealed the decision arguiing that the injury was not forseeable at relevant times, and that there was no reasonable steps they could have taken that would have avoided the injury.

Three Court of Appeal judges rejected the appeal, finding that James Hardie management deliberately concealed the risks because they were “concerned that a realistic warning might have a significant, if not dramatic, effect on the market for its products”.

Decisions

Dust Diseases Tribunal decision

Court of Appeal decision

Related media

Daily Telegraph (11/12/2010)

Contact Us

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Latest News and Blog

WorkCover Notice – Employer Attendance at Medical Consultations

Injured workers have the right to choose their own treating medical practitioner.Read More

Overworked? Underpaid? Here’s how to get what you’re owed

Worried you’re being underpaid, here is what to do.Read More