The widow of asbestos campaigner Bernie Banton says she is disappointed by a decision to clear seven former James Hardie directors of wrongdoing.

The Supreme Court has overturned bans and fines placed on the former directors after they were found to have breached their duty of care by approving a press release about an asbestos compensation fund.

The release claimed the fund provided certainty for both claimants and shareholders, but it was later found to be short by more than $1 billion.

Karen Banton says the ruling sends the wrong message about holding company directors accountable.

"I really wonder whether they believe they've done anything wrong," she said.

"I really think they've convinced themselves that what they did is OK, and yet it was immoral and it will always be immoral."

Ms Banton says fighting for asbestos sufferers has been a long haul and is only going to continue as along as there are asbestos issues.

"[This decision] means there is nothing to stop companies from the big end of town hiding behind the corporate veil in the future and on any matter of issues. So it is a big concern," she said.

Lawyers for asbestos victims involved in the James Hardie case say those suffering have been left wondering who is legally and morally responsible for their illnesses.

Lawyer Tanya Segelov says the Supreme Court's ruling is a disappointing situation.

"I think it's more about a moral feeling - a sense that there are people taking responsibility, about people being held to account for the actions of this company," she said.