Tom Longstaff, a partner at KP Law, says: “The case has been litigated repeatedly in the American judicial system but women in the UK deserve an answer, and compensation, here.
“Asbestos cancers tend to have a latency of around 10 to 40 years. So we are walking into a wave of women reaching an age where asbestos cancers develop.”
Mr Longstaff’s firm sent a pre-action letter to J&J in September, a necessary step before starting proceedings. If the case goes ahead, it would likely end up in court next year.
“This case is a blatant example of corporations placing profits ahead of people,” he says.
“So knowing that there is a risk, a danger of using a particular product, but instead continuing to sell that product knowing it was dangerous and not telling people about the risk.”
Mr Longstaff says that with no independent public body testing products like talcum powder, the public can be left at risk.
“I think it will be surprising to many consumers who assume that products that are made available in their local supermarket or local pharmacy are checked and are tested but unfortunately that’s not the case,” he says.
In response, Erik Haas – worldwide vice-president of litigation for Johnson & Johnson, said the allegations against the company “defy logic, rewrite history and ignore the facts”.
“J&J takes the issue of talc safety incredibly seriously and always has,” he says.
“As our documents show, we have relied upon the most state-of-the-art testing protocols for decades and have been entirely transparent with government institutions and academic researchers regarding our findings.”
Mr Haas also said the idea that J&J hid the contaminated contents of its products from the public, government and other groups was “inconceivable and false”.