Malta Shipyards was ordered to pay over €103,000 in damages to a family for failing to provide the required safety measures against cancer-causing asbestos, which led to the death of a 55-year-old worker.

The shipyards did not provide any protective clothing or masks to Joseph Fenech, who died in 1997 from a serious case of mesothelioma – a lung cancer caused by asbestos fibre, the Court of Appeals ruled.

Chief Justice Silvio Camilleri, Mr Justice Albert Magri and Mr Justice Tonio Mallia, sitting in the appeals court, upheld two judgments handed down by a civil court, confirming the company was responsible for Mr Fenech’s death.

The appeal had been filed by the shipyards after, in 2006, a civil court ruled in favour of Mr Fenech’s wife Carmena and his children Dorothy and James, who had started legal proceedings in June 1997, four months after Mr Fenech died.

The company also appealed a second judgment – handed down in 2008 – where it was ordered by a civil court to pay €103,114 in damages to the Fenech family.

Mr Fenech served at the shipyards for 36 years, having started as yard boy in 1959 and worked his way up to boilermaker until he opted for an early retirement scheme in 1995.

Three years before retiring, he started suffering from shortness of breath, lack of appetite and also developed a cough. Medical tests revealed Mr Fenech was suffering from malignant mesothelioma.

The cancer spread and Mr Fenech died in 1997, aged 55. The autopsy revealed the cancer had been “widely invasive”.

Asbestos is a mineral fibre used in different building construction materials for insulation and as a fire retardant, especially in ships. The fibres are too small to be visible but if inhaled can accumulate in the lungs.

The symptoms of mesothelioma or asbestosis – irreversible lung scarring – do not show up until many years after exposure.

The Fenech family had won civil proceedings against the shipyards, which were ordered to pay compensation for Mr Fenech’s death.

In its appeal, the company said, among other things, the claims by the Fenech family were not only time-barred but also “unfounded”. The family, it said, did not present any evidence that Mr Fenech had been exposed to asbestos while working there. Also, the family had received compensation for his death from a private shipping company and that cleared the shipyards from any blame, the company argued.

But the appeals court took note of evidence provided by a doctor – Emmanuel Farrugia – who categorically said Mr Fenech’s cancer had been caused by asbestos fibres. Also, the presence of the cancerous fibres in his lungs and not his stomach proved these were inhaled.

“This court is convinced there is a link between his work and the disease Mr Fenech had. There is also evidence that various ship owners that used the shipyards acknowledged the existence of asbestos on their ships,” the appeals court said.

The court dismissed the shipyards’ argument that the claim was time-barred because the statutory five years had elapsed. “The time bar starts running at the point it is established the victim suffered harm,” the judges ruled, reiterating an argument made in the judgment handed down by the first court. Otherwise, whoever suffered from mesothelioma could never demand compensation because the disease remained “dormant” for at least 10 years, the Appeals Court noted.

Turning to compensation, the appeals court said it would not take into consideration any compensation the family received from shipping companies. The shipyards had to pay for failing to fulfil their obligations, it said. Thus, the appeals court confirmed the original judgments. When it was read out on Friday morning, Mr Fenech’s children were present in court. “They read it out but it was as though I didn’t know what happened. We went outside and my lawyer told me we won,” Dorothy Fenech said. “I am very happy with the outcome. Justice was made with my father,” she said.

She hoped the judgment would send a positive message and she appealed to all employers to safeguard and protect their workers.

Although she refused to speak about her father’s illness, Ms Fenech said the pain she carried left when the appeal judgment was handed down.

Her voice breaking whenever she mentioned her father, Ms Fenech had nothing but praise for the man he was. “He was a good man. He taught us that work was good and that we had to give our best all the time and help everyone. He was always happy,” she recalled.

“My father always gave his best. Even in his illness, he was an example of what faith should be,” Ms Fenech said.

She thanked former Prime Minister Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici who had started the case as a lawyer, and her lawyer, Juliette Galea, for all their help and support.