CAPE Intermediate Holdings Limited is being asked to pay £10 million for medical research to fund a cure for mesothelioma following shocking revelations that Cape knew more about the dangers of asbestos than was previously thought.  

The demand is being made by the Asbestos Victims Support Groups’ Forum UK following its landmark battle saving the historic documents from destruction and which the forum believes will be vitally important in future asbestos compensation cases.  

The documents were obtained, after the forum commenced court proceedings against Cape following the 2017 case of Concept 70 Limited (employers/insurers) v Cape Intermediate Holdings Limited (Cape — a manufacturer of asbestos goods).  

They would have been destroyed but for the timely intervention of the forum. The documents provide extraordinary evidence that Cape knew about the high risk of fatal cancer caused by the use and handling of asbestos insulation board (AIB), trade name Asbestolux, and show the extent of its interference with the government’s regulation of asbestos in the 1960s and ’70s.  

Cape dismissed the idea to place warning labels on its products due to concerns about profitability. The documents state that “a caution label on our products and none on [our competitors’] would make our selling efforts most difficult.”

The forum has stated that it was shocked by this information which is why it is demanding an apology and for Cape contribute £10 million to medical research to fund a cure for mesothelioma. 

Victims and their families deserve this from Cape for their deliberate deception and shamelessly causing deaths, adding insult to victims by vehemently defending cases.

The documents were part of written material placed before the court in the legal action by Concept 70 and others who were trying to recoup compensation payments they had made to employees in asbestos compensation claims. 

Before judgement was given, the parties agreed in a confidential agreement to destroy the significant documents so they would never come into the public domain, thus continuing to conceal the dangers.  

Graham Dring, the then chair of the forum, instructed Harminder Bains, partner at Leigh Day, to issue an urgent application to preserve the documents.  

His case then proceeded to the Supreme Court and set a legal precedent allowing written material placed before a court to be seen by a non-party.

Bains commented: “Having fought on the forum’s behalf for several years to secure access to these hugely important documents, I felt revulsion and anger when I finally read through the documents to provide the summary of the key points.  

“They clearly show that Cape knew of the high risk of fatal disease, yet deliberately withheld information and lobbied the government to protect their profits. As a result of their greed many men and women, including my father, have lost their lives.  

“In addition, Cape and Concept 70 sought to prevent these documents from coming into the public domain by agreeing to their imminent destruction. 

“This cover-up would not have come to light had it not been for the forum’s persistence and the legal team agreeing to work pro-bono.”

The key documents, which can be accessed from the forum website, asbestosforum.org.uk/cape-documents reveal that Cape encouraged its US partner Johns-Manville to suppress information on the health risks of asbestos and in the late 1950s the idea of a warning label on Marinite sheets was dismissed because of concerns that it would affect profitability.

Cape’s in-house sampling data show significantly higher dust counts than Technical Data Note 13 (TDN13) levels, even when just handling AIB. 

Cape compromised the government’s regulatory response to asbestos by lobbying the British Occupational Hygiene Society (BOHS) and succeeding in downgrading the regulation from a “no dust policy” to a “maximum allowable concentration approach.” It then successfully lobbied to increase the proposed limits.

All the while, Cape adopted a policy of selectively sharing its sampling data with the BOHS, providing evidence of low dust counts and withholding the more damning surveys.

Cape lobbied the government to water down the suggested approach to warning labels on AIB. Internal correspondence shows it campaigned to prevent other manufacturers from introducing warning labels on its own AIB/Asbestolux.

Cape provided misleading reassurance about the dangers of asbestos in its communications with the government and the public, contrary to its own data as to dust counts and health risks of asbestos.

Despite the process by which the BOHS limits had been set, and the fact that they related to asbestosis, Cape engaged a public relations firm to publicly use the limits as a rebuttal against the risk of cancer/mesothelioma.

Cape publicly stated that there was no risk from handling AIB/Asbestolux, despite knowing the high dust counts in its own sampling data.

Cape continued to manufacture AIB/Asbestolux in 1980s, contrary to defending court cases on the basis it had ceased manufacture in 1978. 

If you have a solicitor not on our panel please make them aware of the documents. It is believed that the documents will be of particular importance to solicitors if they are dealing with your case for asbestosis or pleural thickening. 

The all-party parliamentary group subcommittee on asbestos has agreed to support our demands for £10 million from Cape, but we need more support.  

To join our campaign please follow the Asbestos Support Groups Forum on Twitter @AsbestosForum.