In the United Kingdom, the Nuclear Installations Act 1965 places a "strict"
statutory duty on the operators of nuclear facilities to ensure that any e
xposure to radiation resulting from operations does not cause injury or dam
age. A claimant does not have to prove fault to receive compensation under
the Act, only causation. The 1965 Act has been fundamental in shaping litig
ation involving the nuclear industry in the UK. Civil law cases brought und
er the Act will be heard before a single judge (with no jury or technical a
ssessor) who must present his or her decision in a reasoned judgment. This
process leads to a considerable volume of expert evidence being presented t
o the court and extensive cross-examination of witnesses. The expense and u
ncertain outcome of cases involving claims by nuclear workers that occupati
onal exposure to radiation had caused the development of cancer has led to
employers and trade unions setting up the voluntary Compensation Scheme for
Radiation-linked Diseases as an alternative to litigation. This Scheme has
worked well and is held up as a model of alternative dispute resolution. H
owever, a few cases concerning personal injury or damage to property have c
ome before the courts when the defendant nuclear operator considered that t
he claims were technically unjustified and where settlement was not a polic
y option. As anticipated, these cases were lengthy, complex, and expensive.
The radiation doses assessed to have been received by the individuals who
were the subject of claims, whether workers or members of the public, have
been crucial to the outcome. The technical expertise of health physicists a
nd allied specialists has been vital in establishing defensible estimates o
f dose, and this contribution can be expected to remain of high importance
in radiation litigation in the UK.