Loss of tobacco suit means 120 other cases will be dropped
http://www.100md.com
《英国医生杂志》
The widow of a man who died from lung cancer lost a battle against Imperial Tobacco that had lasted more than a decade in the Scottish courts last week. The case is almost certain to be the last attempt for some time to sue over injuries related to tobacco in the UK courts.
At the Court of Session, in Edinburgh, the judge, Nimmo Smith, comprehensively rejected a claim by Margaret McTear that the company should be liable to pay compensation for the death of her husband, Alfred, in 1993 at the age of 48. Mr McTear, a 60 a day smoker, had launched the case himself but his widow carried it on after his death. He died seven days after giving evidence from his sick bed.
In a marathon 350 000 word judgment, which took him 15 months to write, the judge ruled that to succeed Mrs McTear not only had to prove that Imperial Tobacco had caused or substantially contributed to her husband's death, but that the burden was on her to prove even the basic premise that smoking causes lung cancer. The company had not admitted this, and it could not be assumed, he said.
The tobacco industry has been forced to pay out billions of dollars in the United States.
In the United Kingdom, legal aid authorities refuse to fund tobacco litigation, rating the chances of success as too low to justify the huge outlay in costs. That leaves "no win, no fee" deals as the only viable method of funding. But lawyers have been reluctant to take on such cases since a group action by 50 people with lung cancer in England collapsed in 1999, losing the lawyers who backed it on a no win, no fee basis ￡2m in fees and costing them hundreds of thousands of pounds in out of pocket expenses.
Judge ruled that Margaret McTear (above) had to prove that smoking causes lung cancer
Credit: ANDREW MILLIGAN/PA/EMPICS
The case collapsed when the judge, Mr Justice Wright, ruled that most of the claims had been launched too long after the original diagnosis of lung cancer. He refused to exercise his discretion to allow them to go ahead anyway, describing them as "speculative."
In Scotland, Mrs McTear's solicitor, Cameron Fyfe, decided it would be a manageable exercise to go ahead on a no win, no fee basis with just one case, her husband's. Another 120 that had been awaiting the outcome will now be dropped.
The McTears' lawyers argued that before 1971, when warnings appeared on cigarette packets, the tobacco companies knew or ought to have known that smoking cigarettes was injurious to health, but failed to warn consumers. By 1971, Mr McTear was addicted and unable to stop. But the judge ruled that Mr McTear, like the public in general, was aware of the publicity about the dangers of smoking when he started smoking John Player cigarettes, but chose to ignore it.(Clare Dyer, legal correspondent)
At the Court of Session, in Edinburgh, the judge, Nimmo Smith, comprehensively rejected a claim by Margaret McTear that the company should be liable to pay compensation for the death of her husband, Alfred, in 1993 at the age of 48. Mr McTear, a 60 a day smoker, had launched the case himself but his widow carried it on after his death. He died seven days after giving evidence from his sick bed.
In a marathon 350 000 word judgment, which took him 15 months to write, the judge ruled that to succeed Mrs McTear not only had to prove that Imperial Tobacco had caused or substantially contributed to her husband's death, but that the burden was on her to prove even the basic premise that smoking causes lung cancer. The company had not admitted this, and it could not be assumed, he said.
The tobacco industry has been forced to pay out billions of dollars in the United States.
In the United Kingdom, legal aid authorities refuse to fund tobacco litigation, rating the chances of success as too low to justify the huge outlay in costs. That leaves "no win, no fee" deals as the only viable method of funding. But lawyers have been reluctant to take on such cases since a group action by 50 people with lung cancer in England collapsed in 1999, losing the lawyers who backed it on a no win, no fee basis ￡2m in fees and costing them hundreds of thousands of pounds in out of pocket expenses.
Judge ruled that Margaret McTear (above) had to prove that smoking causes lung cancer
Credit: ANDREW MILLIGAN/PA/EMPICS
The case collapsed when the judge, Mr Justice Wright, ruled that most of the claims had been launched too long after the original diagnosis of lung cancer. He refused to exercise his discretion to allow them to go ahead anyway, describing them as "speculative."
In Scotland, Mrs McTear's solicitor, Cameron Fyfe, decided it would be a manageable exercise to go ahead on a no win, no fee basis with just one case, her husband's. Another 120 that had been awaiting the outcome will now be dropped.
The McTears' lawyers argued that before 1971, when warnings appeared on cigarette packets, the tobacco companies knew or ought to have known that smoking cigarettes was injurious to health, but failed to warn consumers. By 1971, Mr McTear was addicted and unable to stop. But the judge ruled that Mr McTear, like the public in general, was aware of the publicity about the dangers of smoking when he started smoking John Player cigarettes, but chose to ignore it.(Clare Dyer, legal correspondent)