Epilim redress scheme would avoid ‘perpetual litigation’

22 April 2023

A redress scheme should urgently be established for the families of children who were detrimentally impacted by in-utero exposure to the anti-epileptic drug sodium valproate (Epilim), a prominent solicitor has passionately argued. Michael Boylan, a respected legal expert who recently secured a staggering £15 million settlement for a 13-year-old boy, revealed that a wave of similar cases is anticipated to flood the UK courts in the coming months.

Boylan emphasised the necessity for the State to assume responsibility and establish a redress scheme akin to the CervicalCheck tribunal, in order to prevent individual families from enduring the arduous litigation process. “This really should be dealt with by an admission of responsibility by the State here. There should be a form of redress scheme set up, like the CervicalCheck tribunal. Each family shouldn’t have to go through the litigation process on an individual basis,” he stated.

Advocating for a more streamlined approach, Boylan urged the establishment of a system that minimises stress for the affected families and curtails legal expenses. “They really should set it up so the stress can be minimised and there can be saving of legal costs as well. Otherwise, there’s going to be perpetual litigation for several years, if not a decade,” he warned.

In 2020, the British government announced its intention to hold an inquiry into the historical licensing and use of Epilim, acknowledging the gravity of the issue. The terms of reference for the inquiry were agreed upon late last year, and the inquiry itself is expected to be officially established within the current year, signifying a crucial step towards justice for the affected families.

If you would like an assessment of a claim, you can use the online form available here without obligation or alternatively you can use the automatic claim calculator.

Follow us for the latest updates & news

Recent News

Northern Ireland exam board boss wins £100,000 settlement

Northern Ireland’s Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA) has paid a substantial settlement to its former interim chief executive who complained of sex, race and age discrimination and constructive dismissal. The sum paid to Margaret Farragher,...

Catriona Crumlish v Health Service Executive – Court of Appeal

On Oct. 15th, The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court decision against Caitriona Crumlish in her claim against Letterkenny University hospital. The plaintiff alleged that there was a failure to detect and diagnose breast cancer in May 2017 resulting in an alleged...

Recent Articles

Psychological Injury

Nervous Shock I The law allows recovery of damages for so called nervous shock, within certain parameters and subject to limitations.  Nervous shock is the most commonly used legal label for psychiatric or psychological injury. Psychiatric injuries include...

Public Authorities and Negligence

Powers and Duties In broad terms, public authorities are subject to civil liability for negligence and other civil wrongs, in the same way as private individuals and companies.  The State and other public bodies are responsible for the actions and omissions of...

Duty of Care (Part 2)

Limits to Neighbour Principle The famous neighbour principle re-stated the general basis of liability in negligence. It stated, that “you must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your...

Duty of Care (Part 1)

Meaning of Negligence I Negligence is used in a number of senses.  In one sense, it refers to a person’s state of mind.  An act is negligent, where it is done without giving due weight to the risks involved.  A person  (and his state of mind) may...

Join our Panel

You May Also Like...