Silica Exposure: An Emerging Risk for Engineered Stone Suppliers and Fabricators

In May 2026, the Health and Safety Executive (‘HSE’) published its first COSHH guidance sheet for engineered stone. Employers that supply, cut or fabricate engineered stone should review the HSE guidance carefully and prepare for inspections without delay.

Failure to do so may result in HSE enforcement, criminal proceedings and increased exposure to civil claims for negligence and breach of statutory duty.

Background

Silicosis is a form of pneumoconiosis caused by the inhalation of respirable crystalline silica (RCS) dust. It occurs when fine silica particles are inhaled into the lungs, triggering an immune response that leads to inflammation and fibrosis, or scarring.

The disease is irreversible, progressive and cumulative, with the level and duration of workplace exposure directly linked to the severity of injury. Traditionally, silicosis has been associated with mining and understood to have long latency periods of 10 to 20 years between silica exposure and the development of the disease. However, there is growing evidence that the incidence of silicosis is increasing, particularly among workers involved in the fabrication of engineered stone products such as quartz worktops.

The HSE estimates that around 600,000 workers in the UK are exposed to silica dust each year. Respiratory Consultant, Dr Feary, of Royal Brompton Hospital has identified a new cohort of relatively young workers developing severe silicosis after comparatively short periods of exposure.

As lead author of the first UK case series of artificial stone-associated silicosis, published in the British Medical Journal in 2024, Dr Feary et al reported a median age of affected workers was 34 years, with four of the eight reported cases developing disease after 4–8 years of exposure. The authors warned that further UK cases are likely to emerge as the popularity of engineered stone worktops continues to grow.

Those concerns appear to be materialising. By November 2025, Dr Feary reported the number of confirmed UK cases of engineered stone-induced silicosis had increased from 8 to 45.

These findings suggest that high-intensity exposure, particularly during the cutting and finishing of engineered stone products such as quartz worktops, may result in significantly more rapid disease progression than has traditionally been associated with silicosis. For businesses operating in this area, silica exposure is therefore becoming one of the most significant occupational health risks.

The legal framework

Silicosis claims are determined by established principles of negligence and statutory duty.

Breach of duty turns on what was known, or ought reasonably to have been known, about the risks of silica exposure at the relevant time. Employers are expected to keep abreast of developing industrial knowledge and implement reasonably practicable measures to control exposure. As a result, industrial disease claims are often fact-sensitive, particularly where historic workplace exposure is alleged.

Unlike mesothelioma claims, where special causation principles apply, silicosis claims remain subject to conventional causation rules. Depending on the circumstances, the courts will apply either the “but for” test or the material contribution test established in Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw [1956] AC 613.

A key feature of silicosis is that it is treated as a divisible disease. The condition is dose-related and cumulative. Liability can therefore be apportioned between different employers or different periods of exposure according to their contribution to the overall injury, often with the assistance of occupational hygienist evidence.

This provides defendants with greater scope to challenge liability and quantum than is typically available in mesothelioma litigation. It also means that early evidence gathering is likely to be critical in the defence of industrial disease claims involving alleged exposure to RCS.

A changing risk landscape and regulatory framework

The risk environment is evolving, with evidence of younger workers developing silicosis after relatively short periods of high intensity exposure, particularly in engineered stonework fabrication.

Regulatory scrutiny is increasing. In May 2026, the HSE published its first regulatory guidance ‘Working engineered stone: control silica risk’ on working safely with engineered stone, making it clear that dry cutting is no longer an acceptable working practice. The guidance instructs employers to:

• switch to engineered stone with a low silica content,
• use water suppression tools to prevent silica dust developing,
• supply appropriate respiratory protective equipment and health surveillance measures to control exposure to RCS dust.

The HSE has also announced a programme of more than 1000 inspections across the UK over the next 12 months, targeting engineered stone fabricators and other high-risk workplaces to ensure compliance with the guidance.

From an employer’s perspective, the publication of this guidance is likely to be significant. From May 2026 onwards, employers who fail to follow the guidance are likely to be found to have constructive knowledge of the dangers of silica dust. A failure to comply may therefore provide strong evidence of breach of duty in civil proceedings and increase the risk of HSE enforcement action.

Internationally, jurisdictions are adopting more interventionist approaches, most notably Australia, which has banned engineered stone products nationwide since 1 July 2024 in response to growing concerns regarding silica-related disease.

Insurance issues

Silicosis claims can give rise to complex insurance considerations, particularly where exposure has occurred over many years or involves multiple employers.

Where a claim is brought by an employee, the relevant Employers’ Liability insurer will generally be the insurer on risk at the time of the alleged exposure, reflecting the period during which the breach of duty is said to have occurred.

As Employers’ Liability insurance is compulsory, there is usually a responding insurer where coverage can be identified. Employers would therefore be well advised to ensure that both current and historic Employers’ Liability insurance records are retained and readily accessible.

However, where exposure occurs outside an employment relationship, for example involving a self-employed contractor or a member of the public, the claim may fall to be considered under a Public Liability policy.

Such policies are often written on a claims-made basis, meaning the insurer on risk when the claim is made may respond, rather than the insurer on risk at the time of exposure, subject to the wording of the policy.

As Public Liability insurance is not compulsory, defendants may face historic silicosis claims without insurance cover in place. Early investigation of insurance arrangements is therefore likely to be an important aspect of any claim, particularly where the exposure involves self-employed contractors or third parties.

Commentary

Silicosis claims are likely to become more prominent as awareness increases and regulatory focus continues to grow. While the legal framework remains unchanged, businesses involved in the supply, cutting and fabrication of engineered stone should immediately review their risk assessments, control measures and health surveillance arrangements. Failure to do so may increase exposure to both civil and regulatory liability.

If you require any further information on silicosis claims or the defence of occupational disease claims generally, please contact Lowri Edwards in our Corporate Claims team.