AstraZeneca Covid jab ‘defective’, claims father in landmark legal case
DRUGS giant AstraZeneca faces a landmark High Court battle over accusations that some doses of its Covid-19 vaccine were ‘defective’ and claims of its efficacy were ‘vastly overstated’.
Two test cases are expected before the court after recipients developed a rare condition following the rollout of the jab in 2021.
The vaccine, developed in partnership with Oxford University, was heralded for its role in the UK’s fightback against Covid, with more than 150million doses administered to date. Some six million lives were saved by the jab, studies show.
But it triggered blood clots in a very small number of people – some that lead to fatal complications. The condition is known as known as vaccine-induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (VITT).
Bringing the court action is IT engineer Jamie Scott, who suffered a brain haemorrhage the day after his first AstraZeneca jab, leaving him with permanent brain damage.
His wife Kate last year told The Mail on Sunday how the father-oftwo, from Warwickshire, was left partially blind and struggles with daily tasks – requiring physiotherapy to help regain movement.
Charity worker Mrs Scott said: ‘It is a miracle that Jamie is still with us. I called the hospital three times to say goodbye. The doctors have said he may never work again.’
Currently, families are entitled to a £120,000 payout if a loved one dies or is left significantly disabled as a result of a Government-recommended jab. But experts say the system is outdated, prompting the court action.
Mrs Scott added: ‘Even if we do get the £120,000 payment, it’s not enough to keep us going for ever. And it’s insulting, considering what Jamie has been through.’
A second claim is being reportedly brought by the widower and two children of Alpa Tailor, 35, who died after having the jab.
If successful it could pave the way for similar claims, thought to be in the region of £1million each.
Mr Scott’s lawyers told the Telegraph they will argue that he suffered ‘personal injuries’, with an allegation that the jab was ‘defective’ and the efficacy of the vaccine had been misleading. AstraZeneca said: ‘From the body of evidence in clinical trials and real-world data, the vaccine has continuously been shown to have an acceptable safety profile and regulators around the world consistently state that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks of extremely rare potential side-effects.’