Agenda and minutes

(Assistant to the Chief Executive) To declare interests in any item on this agenda.

There were no declarations of interest pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct.

Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972, together with paragraphs (6) and (24) of the Council Procedure Rules contained in the Constitution require that the permission of the Chairman be obtained, after prior notice to the Chief Executive, before urgent business not specified in the agenda (including a supplementary agenda of which the statutory period of notice has been given) may be transacted.

In accordance with Operational Standing Order 6 (non-executive bodies), any item raised by a non-member shall require the support of a member of the Committee concerned and the Chairman of that Committee. Two weeks’ notice of non-urgent items is required.

It was noted that there was no other urgent business for consideration by the Cabinet.

Exclusion: To consider whether, under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and press should be excluded from the meeting for the items of business set out below on grounds that they will involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the following paragraph(s) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act (as amended) or are confidential under Section 100(A)(2):

The Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006, which came into effect on 1 March 2006, requires the Council to consider whether maintaining the exemption listed above outweighs the potential public interest in disclosing the information. Any member who considers that this test should be applied to any currently exempted matter on this agenda should contact the proper officer at least 24 hours prior to the meeting.

Confidential Items Commencement: Paragraph 9 of the Council Procedure Rules contained in the Constitution require:

(1)        All business of the Council requiring to be transacted in the presence of the press and public to be completed by 10.00 p.m. at the latest.

(2)        At the time appointed under (1) above, the Chairman shall permit the completion of debate on any item still under consideration, and at his or her discretion, any other remaining business whereupon the Council shall proceed to exclude the public and press.

(3)        Any public business remaining to be dealt with shall be deferred until after the completion of the private part of the meeting, including items submitted for report rather than decision.

Background Papers:  Paragraph 8 of the Access to Information Procedure Rules of the Constitution define background papers as being documents relating to the subject matter of the report which in the Proper Officer's opinion:

(a)        disclose any facts or matters on which the report or an important part of the report is based;  and

(b)        have been relied on to a material extent in preparing the report and does not include published works or those which disclose exempt or confidential information (as defined in Rule 10) and in respect of executive reports, the advice of any political advisor.

Inspection of background papers may be arranged by contacting the officer responsible for the item.

That the public and press be excluded from the meeting for the items of business set out below on the grounds that they would involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972:

Agenda                                                                                   Exempt Information

Item No           Subject                                                           Paragraph Number

5                      Employer’s Liability Claim - Asbestos                        1

(Finance, Performance Management & Corporate Support Services Portfolio Holder) To consider the restricted report (C-135-2007/08).

The Finance, Performance Management & Corporate Support Services Portfolio Holder presented a report concerning the Employer’s Liability Claim for Asbestos received by the Council. The Cabinet were reminded that the Council had received this claim from a former employee in 2007 and that in normal circumstances the Council’s insurers would have handled the claim on the Council’s behalf, with the Council only liable for any policy excess incurred. However, both the Council’s current and former insurers had rejected the claim on the basis that they were not the insurance provider at the relevant time and the Council had been forced to handle the claim directly. On the basis of external legal advice, the Cabinet had previously decided that the claim should be defended and had authorised the appointment of a barrister to appear on the Council’s behalf in any court proceedings. However, having obtained expert engineering advice, it appeared that the claim could not be defended and the Council’s external legal advice was now to settle the claim on the best terms possible.

The Cabinet were informed that the Council would achieve a better settlement if it was possible to conclude the matter before the claimant died. The claimant had already exceeded the life expectancy previously provided in medical evidence, and if the decision was delayed until the next scheduled Cabinet in June then it would substantially reduce the chances of concluding this matter in time. Hence, an extraordinary meeting of the Cabinet had been organised to consider this matter. The Cabinet were reassured that the Council’s contribution to the claim had already been reduced from 56% to 44% of the total claim, with the prospect of this being reduced further still. The Cabinet were advised that, in light of the expert engineering advice received, the best course of action now would be to make a suitable well judged Part 36 offer to all parties involved, in an effort to conclude the case as swiftly as possible.

The Cabinet were also advised that the test case involving insurance companies and a number of local authorities was scheduled to be heard in August, with a decision expected in October 2008. The Council was not directly involved in this action but had been listed on the Court file as having a material interest in the case. Following the resolution of this test case, a further report would be submitted to the Cabinet detailing the options for action available to the Council.

            Decision:

(1)        That Sparling Benham and Brough be authorised to settle this claim on the most favourable terms possible for the Council;

(2)        That Sparling Benham and Brough be requested to cap the Council’s liability at a maximum of 44%, and urged to reduce this liability as much as possible;

(3)        That Sparling Benham and Brough be authorised to make a suitable Part 36 offer to the claimant, all other parties and all other potential parties; and

(4)        That, once the current test case involving Zurich Municipal and Municipal Mutual has been  ...  view the full minutes text for item 199.