Johnson & Johnson accused of deliberately concealing asbestos in their talcum powder products
Sign-up to one of our many Group Actions today - use our quick and easy form to start your claim for compensation.
Begin Your Group Action Claim Today
Sign-up to one of our many Group Actions today - use our quick and easy form to start your claim for compensation.
The big legal cases against Johnson & Johnson over asbestos allegedly being contained in their talc products is continually heating up.
In the latest, Johnson & Johnson have been accused by legal counsel – representing a male who is claiming damages for cancer that he says has been caused by the use of Johnson & Johnson talc – of deliberately concealing knowledge of asbestos in the product.
If true, this may shed a whole new light on the legal cases for compensation against them.
Johnson & Johnson have insisted their talc products do not contain asbestos and are safe to use, yet there have been a number of key legal victories against them on the grounds that they do contain asbestos.
During the closing statements of an ongoing case, the counsel representing an individual claiming damages for mesothelioma against Johnson & Johnson alleged that the medical giant has deliberately hidden the fact they knew their products contained asbestos. He said that Johnson & Johnson used tests that they knew wouldn’t detect toxic material, therefore duping both consumers and regulators.
This is a very serious allegation which, if true, could pave the way for further legal claims against them. It could be a very difficult argument to prove, though. Is it reasonable to have a test for asbestos for this kind of product? Not all tests will identify absolutely everything out there.
Experts have already stated that they believe the talc does contain, or has in the past contained, asbestos.
Prolonged use of the product has therefore been considered as potentially dangerous, which is the primary cause of action for the legal claims against Johnson & Johnson.
We will continue to monitor these cases as they develop…
The content of this post/page was considered accurate at the time of the original posting and/or at the time of any posted revision. The content of this page may, therefore, be out of date. The information contained within this page does not constitute legal advice. Any reliance you place on the information contained within this page is done so at your own risk.