Category: Product Recalls Ireland

Every year there are many product recalls in Ireland which are precautionary measures when the distributor of a product has noticed a design or manufacturing flaw which presents a risk of injury. Relatively few product recalls in Ireland are made after an injury has occurred but, when they do, you may be able to make a claim for product recall in Ireland compensation. Injury compensation claims for product recalls in Ireland are often class action suits were many people are making a claim against the same manufacturer for the same reason. You are not obliged to join a class action suit unless it is beneficial to you and therefore, to establish the best way of claiming injury compensation for product recalls in Ireland, you are invited to call our freephone Solicitors Advisory Bureau and discuss the circumstances of your injury due to a recalled product in Ireland with an experienced Irish solicitor.

Vaginal Mesh labelled ‘Unsafe’ by UK-based Medical Expert

Dr Chris DeArmitt, a specialist chartered chemist who has helped in excess of 9,000 women is have their vaginal mesh compensation legal cases settled, has stated that substance is unsafe to be used in the treatment of incontinence.

Vaginal mesh is, at present,  currently not being used due to suspension in the United Kingdom. This will remain so until the results of an independent safety review are delivered. The study was begun after thousands of women reported harrowing complications. DeArmitt, a leading medical specialist in the UK has appeared upon during court action against producers of vaginal mesh to speak for the prosecutors .

In the United States more than 100,000 people have submitted legal actions as a result of injuries and illnesses that the believe to have been caused by the use of vaginal mesh.

Dr DeArmitt, during an interview with Sky News, said: “There are two main reasons why any plastics material expert will tell you just obviously that this is a bad material and I have never heard anyone who disagrees with me. I see an absolute disregard for proper testing. Testing is way less than you would see on a vacuum cleaner or a washing machine. It’s shocking. I’ve never seen anything like it in my career.”

In Ireland there have some cases submitted in relation to use of vaginal mesh in recent times, particularly in 2017. Legal counsel for a number of women, who began legal actions in 2017 after undergoing the vaginal mesh procedure, said that they (the women) only became conscious of the issue after viewing media reports in the United Kingdom in relation to its use.

The US regulator, the FDA, in 2019 made the sale and distribution of all mesh that was to be used for the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse illegal due to the many safety issues experienced by the general public. In the UK, the National Institute for Care and Excellence (NICE) revealed that it will, once more, be offered as a possible alternative form of treatment for women experiencing various injuries once the ban on using it expires.

A NICE representative stated: “The benefits and risks of each type of treatment are laid out to ensure every woman is fully informed. Where the evidence is limited, this is also highlighted. There are a number of procedures recommended by NICE, including mesh procedures.”

Due to work of a number of campaigners, the use of vaginal mesh has received more and more media attention. Typical pain suffered by  women include chronic pain, not being able to make love, inability to work as usual and walking troubles. These problems arise from vaginal mesh cutting organs or becoming stuck in tissue, leaving permanent nerve damage.

 

 

 

Court Case for Faulty DePuy ASR Hip Replacements Delayed Once Again

The Ohio multidistrict litigation court case for the faulty DePuy ASR hip replacements has been delayed once again and is now rescheduled to start on September 24th.

U.S. District Judge David A. Katz rescheduled the start of the first court case for the faulty DePuy ASR hip replacements to September 24th to allow both parties additional time for discovery and the consideration of other legal matters after the substitution of Ann McCracken in place of the original plaintiff, Faye Dorney-Madgitz.

The reason for the substitution is still unclear and McCracken -v- DePuy was originally scheduled to be the second of the ‘bellwether’ court cases to be heard in a series of Federal cases which will determine how juries will perceive the relative strengths and weaknesses of each case. It is not yet known whether Dorney-Madgitz -v- DePuy is still intender to be heard as a bellwether case, or when that might be.

Ann McCracken made her DePuy injury compensation claim in March 2011; alleging that she suffered a dislocated hip due to metallosis from the DePuy implant damaging the soft tissues around her hip. Ann received her DePuy ASR metal-on-metal hip replacement system in August 2009, but had to undergo revision surgery in January 2011 after her hip dislocated.

The 57-year-old single mother from Rochester in New York claims that when her orthopaedic surgeon removed her DePuy ASR XL Acetabular Hip Replacement System he saw evidence of metallosis which had killed healthy tissue around the implant.

Ann had to undergo further surgery in October 2011 to insert a device restricting the movement of her hip, which has decreased her mobility still further and which will result in her present hip replacement system wearing out quicker than normal – resulting in more operations in the future.

Ann´s case is also to be decided without the DePuy hip replacement recall of August 2010 being referred to in court, after Judge Katz ruled that Ann´s injury “began with the initial implementation” and agreed that, to mention the recall during the court case for the faulty DePuy ASR hip replacements, might deter other companies from voluntarily withdrawing potentially harmful medical devices in the future.

The relative strengths and weaknesses of the plaintiffs´ claims and DePuy Orthopaedic´s defence will be evaluated during the first court cases of the multidistrict litigation, to see if an acceptable yardstick can be determined for the settlement of the other 7,800 claims attached to this court case for the faulty DePuy ASR hip replacements.

If no yardstick can be established – or negative verdicts are delivered by the jurors – the outstanding claims will be referred back to the U.S. District Courts in which they were originally filed, and each will have to be heard individually. This would also be the case in Ireland, where plaintiffs who have served notice of cases against Johnson & Johnson, DePuy Orthopaedics and the Health Service Executive may have to pursue legal action to resolve each court case for the faulty DePuy ASR hip replacements.

Bumbo Seat Recall Due to Baby Injury Claims

Following complaints and reports of injury made to the American Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) a popular series of baby chairs have been recalled due to claims of Bumbo seat injury.

The chairs – which are manufactured for babies aged from 3 months to 10 months – are sold in Ireland through various retail outlets and online stores for around 40 Euros, but have been found to be unstable when used by active children and have lead to several serious injuries when babies have rocked from side-to-side or leant backwards.

Marketed in Ireland as Bumbo Baby Sitters, Bumbo Baby Chairs and Bumbo Baby Chairs, the product was originally withdrawn in 2007 after it was found that parents in the US were placing their new-born children at risk by leaving them unattended and unrestrained in the Bumbo chairs placed on a table. More than twenty reports of infants sustaining injuries due to falling out of Bumbo Baby Chairs were received by the CPSC – including two of a fractured skull injury.

Since the product was re-introduced into the States, more than four million sitters have been sold. However, the application of a label advising parents that the Bumbo baby Seats should not be used at height has not stopped the complaints from continuing. Between 2007 and 2011 the CPSC received more than 50 reports of injuries to children due to using the Bumbo Baby Sitters – with a further 19 skull fractures recorded.

In November 2011, when it was learned that a number of these skull fracture injuries were sustained by children seated on the floor, the CPSC issued a health warning advising parents to be vigilant whenever they placed their children into a Bumbo Baby Seat. This further warning failed to stop Bumbo Baby Sitter accidents from occurring, and now the manufacturer has recalled the baby seats – with the CPSC issuing instructions that they should not be used until a repair kit which includes a safety harness has been obtained from Bumbo International.

In Ireland, parents should also stop sitting their children in the faulty chairs until a restraint has been received from the vendor from whom the sitter was purchased. Although the baby chair recall has not yet been extended to Ireland, parents of children who have sustained an injury due to a faulty chair should contact a solicitor to discuss their right to claim for Bumbo Seat Injury Compensation.

DePuy Compensation For “Poster Girl” For Faulty Hip System

A retired gymnast, who promoted the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement System prior to the product´s worldwide recall last year, is making a personal injury compensation claim against the product´s manufacturers Johnson & Johnson following difficulties with her own DePuy hip replacement system.

Penny Brown (51) of Bath, Wiltshire, had a hip replacement procdure in 2004 to relieve her from the constant pain of osteoarthritis. At the time of the procedure, the DePuy ASR hip replacement system transformed her life to such a degree that she agreed to become the “face” of DePuy and promote their hip replacement systems throughout the UK.

Between 2004 and 2008, Penny was DePuy´s “patient brand” and her image was used throughout the world. Penny also gave interviews about the advantages of the DePuy ASR hip replacement system and counselled patients about to have implant surgery. However, in 2009, Penny started to notice a groin pain which was diagnosed as being caused by the hip replacement system and, as the wear and tear increased, felt a clunking sensation whenever she walked anywhere.

In May this year, Penny was advised that she would need further surgery which would mean the removal of the DePuy ASR hip replacement system and a replacement system installed.  She underwent her additional operation last month, and has been bed-bound and unable to work ever since. “My life has been devastated” Penny told her local newspaper, “I not only feel let down personally but also feel guilty that I might have encouraged others to have the ASR implanted.”