Johnson & Johnson (J&J) is confronting its first major legal challenge in the United Kingdom, with more than 3,000 claimants alleging that the company’s talc-based products, including the iconic Johnson’s Baby Powder, caused cancer such as ovarian cancer and mesothelioma. Filed in the English High Court by KP Law, the lawsuit represents individuals who claim they or their family members developed serious illnesses after using J&J’s products between 1965 and 2023.
Allegations of Asbestos Contamination
According to the lawsuit, J&J’s talc products allegedly contained asbestos, a known carcinogen linked to cancer. Claimants argue that the company knowingly sold products contaminated with asbestos for decades, referencing internal company documents and scientific evidence suggesting J&J was aware of the potential contamination since the 1960s. The law firm claims all mines supplying J&J’s talc included traces of asbestos, making the exposure practically unavoidable.
J&J and Kenvue’s Response
Both Johnson & Johnson and its spin-off Kenvue UK Limited, which assumed responsibility for talc-related claims outside North America after a 2023 corporate restructuring, have denied the allegations. The companies stated that J&J’s baby powder did not, and does not, contain asbestos and is safe when used as intended. J&J has reiterated that its talc met international safety standards and has already replaced talc-based powders globally with cornstarch formulations by 2023.
A Global Legal Battle
The UK case mirrors ongoing litigation in the United States, where J&J faces over 67,000 lawsuits from consumers making similar claims. The company recently faced a $966 million U.S. verdict in a mesothelioma case, one of the largest against it to date. Courts in England typically award compensatory damages rather than punitive ones, meaning the outcome could differ substantially from U.S. rulings. KP Law estimates the UK claim’s total value at around £1 billion ($1.34 billion), marking one of the largest product liability suits in British legal history.
Broader Implications
If the claimants succeed, the verdict could set a precedent for multinational corporations’ accountability in health-related consumer lawsuits. The outcome will also shape the debate on product compliance, corporate transparency, and public trust in personal care products worldwide.
