CLICK to return to story index Door slams shut on former Rossing worker
GREG DROPKIN IN LONDON
A FORMER Rossing Uranium engineer's quest for compensation was thwarted again on Friday when London High Court Judge Michael Wright decided in a written judgement that Eddie Connelly's case was 'time-expired'.
However, Anne Carlson was allowed to proceed in a separate compensation case on behalf of her late husband as Wright dismissed Rio Tinto's attempt to shift the hearing to Windhoek. Peter Carlson died of cancer after working alongside Connelly from 1977 until the early 1980s.
Lawyers are studying the Connelly judgement and considering an appeal.
The Judge dismissed Rio Tinto's attempt to throw the Connelly case out of Court completely. If the allegations were proven, Rio Tinto would owe a "duty of care" and could be held liable if they had failed in their responsibilities, the Judge decided.
Wright also ruled against Rio Tinto's claim that any attempt to prove Connelly's cancer was caused by radioactive uranium dust, was bound to fail.
But Wright ruled that Connelly was already out of time when his current solicitor Richard Meeran issued proceedings in September 1994.
Connelly himself is prepared to fight on and told The Namibian: "It's ridiculous to say I should have quit years ago. I've got to live with the effects of cancer for the rest of my life."
The argument turned on whether Connelly's previous solicitor, a certain Mr Bonnington, had tried or could have tried to bring this case against the English companies in 1989 rather than a straightforward employer's liability claim. At that time, Connelly mistakenly thought his employer was RTZ Services, later known as RTZ Ltd.
Judge Wright felt that Bonnington contemplated suing RTZ Ltd in 1989 when
he could not have considered them as the employer, known to be Rossing. Bonnington's affidavit states "I did not give any consideration to the possibility of suing any other Company within the RTZ Group as I was not aware of any basis on which another Company might be held responsible."
Rio Tinto did not call Bonnington for cross-examination. Even so, Wright inferred that Bonnington must have envisaged the current claim. He ruled that Connelly himself had "constructive knowledge" (through his solicitor) in 1989 that he could sue the London companies. Therefore his claim was time-barred three years later.
Wright then declined to exercise discretion over the time limits. He felt the medical evidence was heavily weighted against Connelly as experts quoted by Rio Tinto found no scientific basis for a radiation link with carcinoma of the larynx.
Other experts said Connelly's cancer risk depended on the dose he had received, particularly if conditions at Rossing in the 1970s led to doses 10 or 100 times higher than those mentioned by the International Atomic Energy Agency in 1992. But "there is absolutely no evidence of any such change of circumstances at the mine," Wright said.
Any debate about conditions in the past would rely on oral evidence and fading memories, Wright felt.
The Judge did not mention an affidavit from Connelly's expert witness Dr JA Dennis who inspected the 1982 Rossing Radiation Report and the IAEA report and commented on the marked contrast between conditions in 1977-84 and 1992.
Nor did Wright note the sample internal Rossing documents exhibited by Connelly's solicitor which detail "very poor" spillage and dust collection at the Crushers in 1978.
Documentary evidence would be produced at any full trial of the Connelly or Carlson claims.
Richard Meeran told The Namibian "I think the decision was unfair and we are considering an appeal. Mr Connelly did absolutely everything it was reasonable for him to do, and he cannot be blamed for any delays in this case. In standing up for himself, he has also helped to open the door for others. I am delighted but not surprised the Judge found that Connelly's House of Lords ruling applies to Mrs Carlson as well. If Rio Tinto appeal the Carlson decision, it will be yet another device to avoid disclosing their evidence."
Also:
Previous stories on Connelly case
December 7, 1998
CLICK to return to story index