Mixed reaction to OPruling
Mixed reaction to OPruling
FARM worker John Hill has won the right to compensation after a High Court judge ruled that he had been exposed to the organophosphate Actellic D.
But Lord Justice Smith said many of Mr Hills continuing symptoms of extreme fatigue, low spirits and immobility were not the result of OP exposure.
Mr Hill, Woodnewton, near Peterborough, was exposed to the chemical while working for William Tomkins Ltd at Apethorpe, near Peterborough. The judge accepted that for a time his symptoms had been severe. But she refused to accept that all his continuing health problems were a result of OP exposure.
Commenting on the case, the NFU Mutual, which represented William Tomkins Ltd, argued that the ruling would lead to a reduction in cases coming to court. Spokesman Tim Price said the rejection that long-term ill-health could result from OP exposure might deter claimants.
But Elizabeth Sigmund, chairman of the OP Information Network, rejected that. She argued it was time for OP cases to be presented before both judge and jury, and that the burden of proof of exposure should not be placed on the defence but on the plaintiff.
The case has prompted the NFU to produce an OP leaflet, Organophosphates – Essential Safety Guidelines, which will go out to members early next month.
Brian Jennings, chairman of the NFUs animal health and welfare committee, said the leaflet, would provide details on symptoms of OP poisoning, protective clothing, environmental precautions and medical advice.
Mr Jennings told FW: "We need to ensure that farmers and users have easy access to our simple guidelines."