Damning reports into Pirbright lapses pave way for legal claims

Lawyers have described reports by the Health and Safety Executive and Professor Brian Spratt, published last Friday, as ‘helpful' to their efforts to seek recompense for farmers.

The reports laid bare a series of biosecurity lapses that contributed to the virus escaping from the site shared by Defra's Institute of Animal Health and pharmaceutical company Merial Animal Health.

The most shocking revelation was that the poor state of the drains had been known about four years but had not been addressed because of a dispute between Merial and IAH about who should pay.

Law firm Clarke Willmott said it was launching a High Court test case to seek direction on which types of businesses are able to make a claim.

It said the HSE and Spratt reports ‘clearly shows fault' on behalf of Merial and Defra, which regulates and inspects the Pirbright site and funds IAH, but leaves unanswered questions about ‘who should shoulder the impact of the outbreak'.

Clarification is still needed on who was owed a duty of care by Merial and DEFRA and, therefore, who can claim as a result.

Liverpool-based Kirwans is acting on behalf of a group of affected farmers, exporters and abattoirs seeking compensation for the losses they have suffered.

Senior partner David Kirwan said the report's findings appeared to contain grounds for legal action as it was clear proper precautions had not been taken.

Thring Townsend Lee and Pembertons is acting for the NFU in a class action against Merial and/or IAH.

Peter Cusick, the company's head of agricultural litigation, said: “We are now in the process of instructing our QC to finalise his opinion, in the light of these developments, with a view to progressing claims for those losses.”

NFU president Peter Kendall said he found it ‘well-nigh incredible and quite indefensible' that standards should have been as lax as these reports appear to reveal.