translated from Spanish: Justice ordered to compensate for $125 million to family of deceased cancer caused by exposure to asbestos

The tenth seventh Civil Court of Santiago ordered the Industrial Company Pizarreño S.A., to pay a total of $125 million compensation to the spouse and children of neighbor of the cement plant of the business ESA, who died in may 2016, by developed by aspiration of asbestos lung cancer.
In the ruling, judge Rocío Pérez Gamboa condemned the company, after establishing that the victim developed pathology to be for years exposed to the mineral that emanated from the industrial plant of asbestos-cement, located in the commune of Maipú, and by the years that washed the clothes contaminated from his father, who worked for the respondent.
“Appreciating the test yielded by the parties to the dispute, can be conclude that the pathology called malignant pleural mesothelioma, which caused the death to the Mrs. Julieta Bernal Trigo in may 2016, was due to asbestos exposure in the period he lived in the” population Pizarreno adjacent to the factory they worked their father, worker of the same plant, and by exposure to contaminated clothing, as corroborated by the statements of witnesses and accompanied documents to cars, from which is It is clear that the clothes of these was often taken to houses and sanitizing them began to be held in a period subsequent to the exposure suffered by the Mrs. Bernal”, says the ruling.
The resolution adds that “the medical literature is answer on the close relationship that exists between the pleural mesothelioma tumor and exposure to asbestos, considering that according to the clinical file of Ms. Bernal accompanied to the folder” Electronics, its symptomatology corresponds exactly to the one described by the medical articles cited, in terms of the type of tumor developed, his unpredictability on the part of the plaintiff, his mortality and by the way, the fact affect the pulmonary pleura which is one natural consequence of exposure to asbestos”.
“(…) It is a principle – continues – the modern law of civil responsibility that who operates a business or company you reported profits, even if lawful, if it does damage to persons, must bear the cost of the pecuniary repair of these damages. It’s a reason for corrective justice to try to balance the gap between the doer (company) and the damaged (private), makes the wrongful act to the latter an impaired position with respect to the first. It is said that the victim does not have why to withstand the damage suffered as a result of the exploitation of one activity of another, especially if this who causes the damage benefits economically”.
To judge, “this does not say relationship with the establishment of a strict liability created risk as it has been interpreted by the respondent Pizarreno, but rather, an argument that is inserted within the subjective responsibility or” “blame the company and that justify the attribution of responsibility for the inefficient handling of material and technical resources beyond that economic activity itself is lawful or in accordance with the regulations, disagree so defense”.
“That in this regard, the testimony by former workers of Pizarreno is entirely relevant for the purposes of checking the above premise, because they stated that in the Decade of the 60´y 70´, asbestos was produced on dry and moved in that State” inside the plant, which no doubt favoured recreation through the air, and that only in the Decade of the 80´ began performing this process through a system of moisture to prevent the volatizacion of this harmful product. The same happens with the measure of clothes washing that happened only since the way that does not fit in the previous period, but conclude that the cleaning of the clothes of the workers of the industrial plant, the 80´ was in charge “, causing them contamination not only these, but his family in their homes”, adds.
“(…) Consequently, according to the reasoned above, is credited the respondent negligent fact Pizarreño in order that its handling of asbestos, despite having knowledge of their danosidad, it was not appropriate, nor sought to minimize its harmful effects, enabling This exposure to such substance by its workers, in particular Mr. Bernal and as a result, his daughter who lived in a building adjacent to the industrial plant”, he says.
“Indeed, Mrs. Julieta Bernal Trigo was exposed to environmental contamination that migrated to his home from the company, both in the air, as to asbestos particles contained in the clothes of his father’s work, which washed for it in your home because of not having the company, inside of it, of a system of such contaminated clothes washing, but until the year 1989 “, he concludes.

Original source in Spanish