“The regular inspection of all asbestos-containing materials identified in appendix 2 is recommended. Provided the materials found to contain asbestos are maintained in good condition and are not damaged or disturbed, they may remain in place. If any deterioration / damage is noted, then consideration will need to be given to repair or removal. In the long term, consideration should be given to the removal of all asbestos materials, due to the potential for deterioration / damage. NCC should ensure that no work on or affecting asbestos-containing materials is undertaken before an adequate assessment of potential exposure is carried out. Any such work will require precautions to be taken. In the majority of cases, it is advisable to have the asbestos removed by a licensed contractor.”
"The type of ceiling tile in the corridors would have to be checked prior to the start of any works and specialist contractors engaged for the same removal if required. We are unable at this stage to give any idea of costs which may be incurred under this item."
"It may be cost-effective and remove future asbestos problems if the corridor areas where tiles are being removed were removed in total and placed with a lay in grid system."
“With regard to the remedial / builders’ works, I am worried about the health and safety implications with regard to the asbestos tiles. I don’t feel that we are able to quote for this work without knowing the extent of the asbestos, disposal of the said tiles, whether we are allowed to reinstate the tiles etc. T James (Electrical) are not sufficiently qualified to deal with the above problems and I suggest that an asbestos specialist should be employed to carry out a test and risk assessment for this contract. We would be only too willing to quote for the required works involved, although I would imagine that it would be cheaper to arrange this direct.”
“It was a tremendous test on the school and I think that we are very proud of the way that we got the school back on its feet and the way our students responded…..It was a very emotional period. I’m quite upset about it, and it was a long time in the past.”
"Careful consideration must be given as to not only the level of risk actually posed by the asbestos fibre contamination identified, but also the risk perceived by others. It is essential that the school’s employees, pupils, parents and governors have full confidence that the school is safe to re-enter and that no residual risk remains. Due to the scale of asbestos removal and decontamination works required to suitably remediate this situation, it is recommended that the remedial works must initially err on the side of caution but be regularly reviewed and monitored to ensure that they remain suitable and sufficient. Further, and ongoing, tests and inspections shall be required to try and accurately quantify the level of asbestos contamination in various areas, so the level of remedial works could be amended if necessary. It must be noted that alternative (lesser) remediation options could be proposed, and possibly conducted, that would in principle potentially comply with the minimum legal standard. However, it is our opinion that should any lesser standard be utilised it would probably not only be unacceptable to the school but it would also leave a significant residual risk to the school's users in terms of health, future litigation, ongoing maintenance requirements (increased costs) and viability due to loss of confidence by parents and others. All of these factors were taken into consideration when detailing the recommendations within this report."
“The school is well-resourced overall. This is mainly because departments have new resources to replace those lost last year. Considerable funding has gone into ICT resources which include hardware, software, data projectors and interactive whiteboards…..The crisis brought about by the asbestos contamination set back the implementation of ICT across the subjects of the curriculum. Subsequently, computer resources have been replaced and updated and the ratio of computers to students is now well above the national average for secondary schools.”
‘This reinforced concrete is out of my line. And I would like you to employ a structural engineer to deal with this aspect of the matter.’
“The plaintiffs failed to provide any documents relating to the work carried out by Marlothian and there is no evidence that the plaintiffs have paid or are liable to pay any sum to Marlothian in respect of that work. It was submitted on behalf of the plaintiffs, however, that if the repairs were necessary and were carried out it was not to the point that the plaintiffs had not proved that they had paid for the repairs themselves. Our attention was drawn to The Endeavour (1890) 6 Asp.M.C. 511, where repairs to a vessel were carried out, but before paying for them the plaintiff had gone bankrupt. It was there argued that the plaintiff could not claim the cost of the repairs because the sums recovered would only go to swell the creditors’ funds. This argument was rejected and it was said, at page 512: ‘If somebody out of kindness were to repair the injury and make no charge for it, the wrongdoer would not be entitled to refuse to pay as part of the damages the cost of the repairs to the owner.’ In my judgement, on the facts of this case, the submission is correct. It is true that as a general principle a plaintiff who seeks to recover damages must prove that he has suffered a loss, but if property belonging to him has been damaged to an extent which is proved and the court is satisfied that the property has been or will be repaired I do not consider that the court is further concerned with the question whether the owner has had to pay for the repairs out of his own pocket or whether the funds have come from some other source.”