CLICK to return to story index Rossing cases underway in swirl of legal papers
GREG DROPKIN IN LONDON
A NEW type of London fog descended on the Royal Courts of Justice on Monday.
Thousands of pages are swirling around the High Court in the latest eight-day procedural hearing brought by Rossing Uranium's owner Rio Tinto.
The mining giant aims to "strike out" the compensation claim brought by throat cancer patient and former Rossing worker Edward Connelly, without producing internal documents for a full trial. Connelly's former colleague Peter Carlson died from cancer of the oesophagus in 1995. Rio Tinto demands that his widow Anne Carlson bring her compensation claim in Windhoek, not London.
The legal argument finally began on Monday afternoon after Judge Michael Wright spent two days digesting the papers.
Rio Tinto give three major grounds to stop Connelly now.
They argue the case does not show any reason why the parent company is responsible to Connelly for whatever may have happened to him at Rossing.
Connelly says Rio Tinto, Rio Tinto Overseas Services, and Rio Tinto London (formerly RTZ Services) controlled the mine and the policies under which it operated, and employed key personnel responsible for implementing those policies when he worked there from 1977 to 1982.
Rio Tinto asserts there is no scientific evidence which could conceivably show Connelly's throat cancer was likely to arise from exposure to radioactive uranium dust.
The company quotes the International Atomic Energy Agency report written after visiting Rossing in 1992, and an expert opinion prepared by the eminent specialist Sir Richard Doll. Connelly quotes other experts and insists any argument about throat cancer and radiation should take place at the trial itself, where witnesses can be cross-examined and evidence on working conditions and exposures in the 1970s can be tested.
Rio Tinto claims Connelly brought his case too late for it to be considered, and the company's interests would be prejudiced by a trial after so many years. Connelly served his papers on RTZ, as it was then known, in September 1994 and blames the company for the various delays. But Rio Tinto says he knew, or could have found out, all the relevant circumstances once he was diagnosed with cancer in 1986.
In England, once a claimant knows he may have a case it should be brought within three years. If the court feels the injured party would suffer undue hardship from the time limit, they can allow a longer delay.
Namibia has a strict three-year cut-off once the "creditor" (Connelly) knows the identity of the "debtor" (Rio Tinto) and the facts leading to the "debt". Later this week lawyers will debate whether Namibian law is relevant, and just when Connelly knew he could claim against Rio Tinto.
Next week Connelly will try to bring charges against Rio Tinto London, which as RTZ Services employed the former Chairman and Chief Executive of Rossing Ronnie Walker.
RTZ Services also helped to organise a world wide price fixing cartel and arranged uranium contracts which Rossing had to deliver from the late 1970s onwards.
The company say Connelly could have named Rio Tinto London three years ago, had he so wished. Connelly points out he was being dragged through a three-year battle until the House of Lords upheld his right to a London hearing.
Despite the Lords ruling Rio Tinto demand the Carlson hearing shift from London to Windhoek. Mrs Carlson lives in South Africa and could, Rio Tinto say, fund her case using South African legal aid and Namibian resources.
Mrs Carlson disputes that sufficient funding is available in southern Africa and argues her case should be joined with the Connelly hearing in London.
Also:
Rossing cancer case gets underway
November 18, 1998
CLICK to return to story index