Hepatitis and HIV Compensation
posted: 19/04/2010
An award-winning composer who contracted HIV and hepatitis C after receiving contaminated blood on the NHS around twenty years ago has made more progress in the legal battle for compensation.
Andrew March, 36, applied for a Court order to overrule the government’s decision not to award compensation similar to the compensation given to people infected by blood products in the Republic of Ireland.
An independent inquiry last year called for an overhaul of payouts to those who got HIV and / or hepatitis in the 1970s and 1980s through transfusions with unscreened and untreated contaminated blood. Ministers refused.
But a High Court judge has now ruled that the Government’s approach “has been, and remains, infected by error.”
Inquiry recommended compensation like in Ireland
The 2009 inquiry by Lord Archer of Sandwell found that 4,670 haemophiliacs who received blood transfusions in the 1970s and 1980s were infected with hepatitis C, of whom 1,243 were also infected with HIV.
By May last year, almost 2,000 people had died as a result, and £142 million has been paid in compensation to victims.
But the inquiry recommended that British victims be compensated on the same level as in Ireland, where those who contracted hepatitis C from contaminated blood were paid on average £750,000, and people infected with HIV received up to £101,000.
Dodgy excuse to say no
The Government refused to pay patients a similar level of compensation as it argued that the Irish blood transfusion service was found to be at fault, which was not the case in the Britain. This interpretation is disputed both in Ireland and the UK.
Although the government announced increased compensation for those who got HIV, it only offered to review the hepatitis payments in another five years. It refused to assess payments in the same way as Ireland.
Judge warns against 'false optimism'
Mr Justice Holman, sitting in the High Court, said that this argument was flawed, but that it was not his role to rule on the amount that should be paid, adding that campaigners should not now have “false optimism”. “I have given no steer or indication whatsoever as to what the Government may decide upon reconsideration, and it would be a grave abuse of my role if I were to do so,” he said. “The campaign may now return to the political arena, but no one should leave this courtroom with a false optimism.”
The Department of Health now says it would "now consider the position".
Mr March said: “Having the judgement go in our favour gives us no pleasure at all. The judge’s decision proves the flawed basis on which the Government made it decision not to implement the recommended compensation scheme. The judgment now compels the Government to retake the decision lawfully and based on accurate information.”
Source
Source 2
Permalink