The principle of intentional fault
For Eric Jonckheere and his advisers, the only legal means is to highlight the principle of intentional fault. Jan Fermon, one of the lawyers, explains that the strategy is therefore to prove in court that Eternit’s fault was deliberate: ” The victim can only sue the person responsible for the contamination for the difference, therefore for the part of the damage which is not compensated, if he demonstrates that there is an intentional fault committed by the person responsible for the pollution. “
In 2000, shortly before his death, Éric Jonckheere’s mother, Françoise Van Noorbeeck, had refused compensation in order to safeguard his freedom of speech and to bring a civil liability action once morest the company Eternit. A lawsuit won posthumously, his sons having continued his action following his death. The judgment delivered by the court of appeal confirmed the judgment of the court of first instance. Namely that manufacturers knew the dangerousness of asbestos since at least the beginning of the 1960s. Justice therefore established Eternit’s responsibility for the cancer that killed Mrs. Van Noorbeeck. A first in Belgium.
It is therefore on this basis that Jan Fermon, one of Eric Jonckheere’s lawyers, believes that the conditions are met to say that Eternit has indeed committed an intentional fault: ” For example, there is waste from the production of asbestos cement pipes which has been given free to the population for use in gardens etc. in Belgium, the Netherlands and Italy. It is obviously something unimaginable to give the population free toxic waste to get rid of it in reality. It seems to me an intentional act because at that time, we know that it will cause deaths. “