(Re: Norman Greensitt) Jengro Limited v Seltsam Limited [2013] NSWDDT 2

(Re: Norman Greensitt) Jengro Limited v Seltsam Limited [2013] NSWDDT 2

The cross-claimant failed because the only direct evidence that Wunderlich supplied products to the building site was Mr Greensitt's statement of belief, without identification of particular products or brand names. The descriptions of product types, including standard corrugated asbestos cement sheets, did not establish manufacture or supply by Wunderlich, especially where James Hardie made similar products. The cross-claimant, as employer, produced no business records or other evidence showing that Wunderlich supplied materials to its sites, and Mr Rogers' expert evidence did not remedy that insufficiency.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Dust Diseases Asbestos Mesothelioma Cross Claim / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Verdict for the cross-defendant.
Legal Topics
['asbestos Exposure' 'mesothelioma' 'cross Claim' 'product Identification' 'expert Evidence' 'causation']
['dust Diseases' 'tort Law' 'evidence'] ['asbestos Exposure' 'mesothelioma' 'cross Claim' 'product Identification' 'expert Evidence' 'causation']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Dust Diseases Asbestos Mesothelioma Cross Claim / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the cross-defendant supplied asbestos-containing material to the cross-claimant that caused or contributed to Norman Greensitt's mesothelioma." "Whether the cross-claimant's evidence, including Mr Greensitt's evidence, company materials, transcripts from other proceedings and expert evidence, sufficiently identified Wunderlich products as products used during Mr Greensitt's employment."]

Ratio Decidendi

The cross-claimant failed because the only direct evidence that Wunderlich supplied products to the building site was Mr Greensitt's statement of belief, without identification of particular products or brand names. The descriptions of product types, including standard corrugated asbestos cement sheets, did not establish manufacture or supply by Wunderlich, especially where James Hardie made similar products. The cross-claimant, as employer, produced no business records or other evidence showing that Wunderlich supplied materials to its sites, and Mr Rogers' expert evidence did not remedy that insufficiency.

Court Disposition

Verdict for the cross-defendant.

Orders

  • ['The cross-claimant failed to satisfy the Tribunal that the cross-defendant supplied material that caused in any way the mesothelioma suffered by the plaintiff.' 'Verdict for the cross-defendant.']