Compensation for alleged vaccine harm-related pain: Another claimant experiences courtroom setback
In the court case, the claimant sought a minimum of 200,000 euros in damages from the pharmaceutical company, alleging that following a COVID-19 vaccination in 2021, he developed kidney problems, alongside other health issues. The claim was made that the vaccination was responsible for his illnesses. Neither the specific vaccine nor the manufacturer were identified.
The lower court declared that the specific vaccine in question had undergone rigorous evaluation by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) prior to receiving approval. The absence of a "negative benefit-risk balance" was cited, a prerequisite for acknowledging claims against the manufacturer. In the context of the pandemic, the benefits of the vaccine for the public at large surpassed the individual risks associated with vaccination.
Previously, other German courts had reached similar conclusions in similar cases. For instance, in July, the Higher Regional Court of Koblenz dismissed a woman's lawsuit against a vaccine manufacturer, citing the positive "benefit-risk balance" and also referencing the licensing authorities. It was established that there was no guarantee or promise of complete protection against complications, and the plaintiff failed to provide evidence linking her ailments to the vaccination.
Despite the claimant's assertions, the verdict in the Court of Justice upheld the lower court's decision, emphasizing the thorough examination of the vaccine by the European Medicines Agency. The court ruled that no 'negative benefit-risk balance' was found, thereby rejecting the claimant's case for damages.
