CLICK to return to story index New hitch for Rossing cancer cases
GREG DROPKIN IN LONDON
CANCER compensation claims by two former Rossing Uranium miners were set to come before the High Court in London this morning, but late on Friday afternoon lawyers acting for Edward Connelly and Anne Carlson, the widow of Peter Carlson, were suddenly informed that no judges are available.
An expert legal witness had already flown to London from South Africa.
Unless a slot appears later this week, the Rossing claims are now likely to be delayed for several months. Connelly began his fight in 1988 and lodged his current claim against Rio Tinto in 1994.
When it takes place the courtroom battle is scheduled to run for at least five days. But it will not examine the full evidence that exposure to radioactive dust caused Edward Connelly's throat cancer or led to the death of his colleague Peter Carlson from cancer of the oesphagus. Instead, it will consider Rio Tinto's latest attempt to block both cases on procedural grounds.
About twenty years ago, both men worked at Rossing's primary crusher which breaks giant boulders containing uranium ore.
His widow Anne Carlson claimed compensation in London earlier this year after Connelly had won a decisive victory at the House of Lords in July 1997. Britain's highest court ruled 4-1 in favour of Connelly's right to proceed in London where he has access to Legal Aid.
The Lords recognised that a fair trial required the funds for expert scientific and medical witnesses. Their verdict was hailed as a historic decision ending three years of legal argument with consequences for all British transnational companies and all employees who lack access to the necessary funding for a trial outside Britain.
Yet when Anne Carlson lodged her claim in February Rio Tinto immediately demanded the case be shifted to Windhoek, the same argument they had used in Connelly's case.
This week the High Court was to decide whether the House of Lords verdict guarantees Anne Carlson the right to trial in London, where she has access to Legal Aid.
Solicitor Richard Meeran who acts for Carlson and Connelly is very surprised that Rio Tinto are questioning the Lords' decision. But it seems Rio Tinto are not the only ones upset by the Lords.
Recently the Lord Chancellor's department asked lawyers and academics to decide on the possibility of legislation to reverse the House of Lords verdict and thereby prevent further claims against British companies. Connelly's lawyers understand that the idea was given the thumbs down by most of those consulted.
Meanwhile, Rio Tinto aim to strike out Connelly's compensation claim without a full trial of the evidence.
First, the company are expected to argue that the former Rossing engineer failed to bring his case to court in time and that Rio Tinto would be prejudiced if it is heard now. Connelly was severely ill during the 1980s and it then took two years for the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner in Namibia to reject his original claim against Rossing Uranium. The Commissioner ruled that Connelly's illness was not the result of an accident and that throat cancer was not a "Scheduled Disease" under the Act. In 1993 his current solicitors advised Connelly that he could claim against Rossing's parent company in Britain. Rio Tinto's legal manoeuvres to block the case have delayed it for the last four years.
Secondly, Rio Tinto is expected to present expert scientific evidence that the radiation levels at Rossing are too low to cause throat cancer. However, because this is only a "preliminary trial" Connelly will not have the right to cross examine Rio Tinto's experts.
Other scientists argue that Connelly's exposure could have caused the cancer. Connelly demands that the company produce their own documents on conditions at Rossing in 1977-1982 before a full trial can consider the scientific argument. Although his lawyers have obtained some internal reports they are insisting on full disclosure.
November 2, 1998
CLICK to return to story index