I think gents you have to remember that
It is not paranioa, it is the harsh facts of EASA and whilst you say how can you be held liable for what was carried out 25 years ago? well as the signatory on the ARC I and others are stating that all the inspections on the Aircraft have been carried out, failing to ensure that leaves us all open to prosecution.
is not UK law. Any prosecution would be done in the UK and you would have the usual defences of due diligence, etc.
This HAS to be the case (i.e. there has to be a backstop, plus UK law applies anyway regardless of the wording of some EASA reg) otherwise the system would be unworkable.
Any residual liability is addressed with insurance and you pay the premium and forget about it. That's how lawyers dentists etc do it.