Insurers face trouble from Monsanto glyphosate ruling

Monsanto has been ordered to pay $289 million damages to a man who claimed herbicides containing glyphosate had caused his cancer in a court ruling that sets worrying precedent for insurers, according to law firm Clyde & Co.

In a landmark case, a Californian jury found that Monsanto knew its Roundup and RangerPro weedkillers were dangerous and failed to warn consumers, according to an Aug. 11 BBC News report.

This is the first lawsuit to go to trial alleging a glyphosate link to cancer.

Monsanto denies that glyphosate causes cancer and says it intends to appeal against the ruling.

“The regulatory position on glyphosate is split, but the ruling on Friday 10 August in the Monsanto case requires careful consideration by companies and their insurers,” said David Wynn, partner at Clyde & Co.

Countries including Canada and Australia are imposing restrictions on public and private use. France also intends to impose a ban on glyphosate within the next three years. In contrast the EU has recently renewed the license for glyphosate use for another five years and last December the US Environmental Protection Agency released its draft health risk assessment concluding that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.

If the findings of the WHO, which in 2015 concluded that exposure to glyphosate doubled a person’s risk of developing non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) are accepted as conclusive, a dose related exposure that is deemed to double the risk of lymphoma would be likely to satisfy the UK's and other common law jurisdictions' evidential tests to render the loss compensable.

“Employers whose personnel use the chemical are most at risk of exposure to claims, although this has the potential to extend to consumers using the product and possibly even to cases of environmental exposure. Such a confusing position also brings inherent supply chain risks,” Wynn explained.

“The uncertainty has not deterred plaintiff lawyers, who are increasingly focusing on the potential link between glyphosate and cancer,” Wynn noted.

“It is understood more than 800 lawsuits are waiting in the wings in the US and this decision could result in a slew of lawsuits, both in the US and internationally.

“Similar allegations have been made against Johnson & Johnson in the ongoing asbestos talc litigation, which has resulted in a spate of high profile cases in which significant punitive damages have been awarded by juries, despite uncertainties in the scientific evidence.”

A woman who claimed her cancer was caused by using Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder for decades said she believes justice was served after a jury found the company should pay her and 21 other women $4.69 billion in damages, according to a Reuters July 19 report.

“Against this backdrop, employers and their insurers must be mindful of this developing regulatory and claims environment and will wish to consider steps to assess and mitigate their potential risks.

Get all the latest re/insurance industry news with our daily newsletter -  sign up here.

More of today's news

Bain offers £1.2bn to take esure private

Cat bond issuance third largest in history in Q2

Insurtech Pie Insurance secures $11m for expansion

Everest Re hires reinsurance chief claims officer from Chubb

Turbulence in after-the-event market goes on, says ARAG’s Buss

XL bolsters North America construction team

AXIS appoints Kelly as head of ceded reinsurance

Liberty expands general liability in Netherlands

Don't miss our insurtech email newsletter - sign up today