You seem to know as little about this case as jlogajan. None of these "main cancer authorities" deny a known link, they merely have refused to draw an official conclusion. These authorities are publicly funded and have a clear interest in avoiding this political issue. The legal error was in that the judge used faulty reasoning in assuming that their silence, in and of itself, is a negative statement about the public knowledge of an existence of a link. The action was analogous to the judge saying tobacco companies can't be held liable for printing "smoking does not cause cancer" on cigarette cartons because the National Institute for Health hasn't gotten around to claiming there is a definitive link.
All the available evidence, as long as you exclude the research conclusions of the leading cancer authorities and all the researchers who agree with them.
Wrong again, there are no research conclusions from the "leading cancer authorities" denying this link since they haven't funded sufficient research in this area to base the conclusions on. All they have done is ignore the research that has been done, all of which has demonstrated the abortion/breast cancer link to varying degrees.