米国最高裁判所は、ワクチンメーカーを保護
米国最高裁判所は、責任から ワクチンメーカーを保護
The United States Supreme Court protects vaccine makers from liability
http://www.examiner.com/article/the-united-states-supreme-court-protects-vaccine-makers-from-liability … via @examinercom
Last year, the United States Supreme Court ruled that federal law protects pharmaceutical companies from lawsuits by parents who say that vaccines injured their children. Two Supreme Court Justices, Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, dissented in Bruesewitz v. Wyeth. They said that the threat of lawsuits provides an incentive for vaccine makers to constantly monitor and improve their products.
The decision was a victory for the pharmaceutical companies who make vaccines. The attorney who represented Wyeth in the case before the court told justices that ruling against the pharmaceutical company could lead to thousands of lawsuits in which parents claim, for example, that the mumps, measles and rubella (MMR) vaccine played a role in their children's autism. The Obama administration backed the vaccine makers while consumer groups and others supported the plaintiffs.
The case was brought to court by a couple on behalf of their 18-year-old daughter. The young woman began to have seizures as an infant after receiving the third of five scheduled doses of Wyeth's Tri-Immunol diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus vaccine. She now needs to be taken cared of for the rest of her life. Wyeth, now owned by Pfizer, has since taken the drug off the market.
The federal law at the time - 1986 - said that all such claims must first go to a special court frequently referred to as the "Vaccine Court," a tribunal that has awarded over $2.5 billion for vaccine-injury claims since 1989. It is paid for by a tax on vaccines. The Vaccine Court ruled against the parents who, in turn, sued under Pennsylvania tort law. The company had moved the case to federal court where and judges have consistently ruled that the suit cannot go forward, because federal law does not allow death or injury claims against vaccine makers arising from "design defects" in vaccines.
Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/22/AR2011022206008.html
名古屋大学尾崎紀夫氏 （■自閉症とワクチンに関する論文追記）記事より
予防接種の後遺症や死亡の保障を一般法廷で認めるなどしたら、
MMRが原因で自閉症になったとの訴訟が無数におきて対応できなくなるという理屈が、
ワクチン会社を免責する理由らしい
「米最高裁 ワクチン製造会社は訴訟の対象ではない」
2011年2月の記事
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/22/AR2011022206008.html
via Tweet Button
2012.10.28 10:58
ツイート
The United States Supreme Court protects vaccine makers from liability
http://www.examiner.com/article/the-united-states-supreme-court-protects-vaccine-makers-from-liability … via @examinercom
Last year, the United States Supreme Court ruled that federal law protects pharmaceutical companies from lawsuits by parents who say that vaccines injured their children. Two Supreme Court Justices, Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, dissented in Bruesewitz v. Wyeth. They said that the threat of lawsuits provides an incentive for vaccine makers to constantly monitor and improve their products.
The decision was a victory for the pharmaceutical companies who make vaccines. The attorney who represented Wyeth in the case before the court told justices that ruling against the pharmaceutical company could lead to thousands of lawsuits in which parents claim, for example, that the mumps, measles and rubella (MMR) vaccine played a role in their children's autism. The Obama administration backed the vaccine makers while consumer groups and others supported the plaintiffs.
The case was brought to court by a couple on behalf of their 18-year-old daughter. The young woman began to have seizures as an infant after receiving the third of five scheduled doses of Wyeth's Tri-Immunol diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus vaccine. She now needs to be taken cared of for the rest of her life. Wyeth, now owned by Pfizer, has since taken the drug off the market.
The federal law at the time - 1986 - said that all such claims must first go to a special court frequently referred to as the "Vaccine Court," a tribunal that has awarded over $2.5 billion for vaccine-injury claims since 1989. It is paid for by a tax on vaccines. The Vaccine Court ruled against the parents who, in turn, sued under Pennsylvania tort law. The company had moved the case to federal court where and judges have consistently ruled that the suit cannot go forward, because federal law does not allow death or injury claims against vaccine makers arising from "design defects" in vaccines.
Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/22/AR2011022206008.html
名古屋大学尾崎紀夫氏 （■自閉症とワクチンに関する論文追記）記事より
予防接種の後遺症や死亡の保障を一般法廷で認めるなどしたら、
MMRが原因で自閉症になったとの訴訟が無数におきて対応できなくなるという理屈が、
ワクチン会社を免責する理由らしい
「米最高裁 ワクチン製造会社は訴訟の対象ではない」
2011年2月の記事
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/22/AR2011022206008.html
via Tweet Button
2012.10.28 10:58
スポンサーサイト
ツイート
