Lynette Rowe won’t have to fight thalidomide battle in Germany

Lynette Rowe

Lynette Rowe won’t have to go to Germany for her case.
Source: Herald Sun




A WOMAN who was born without arms and legs will not have to go to Germany to fight her compensation legal battle against a thalidomide manufacturer.


A Supreme Court judge today dismissed an application by German pharmaceutical giant Grunenthal, a company earning more than $1 billion, which claimed it would be “oppressive” to fight the compensation case of Lynette Rowe in the Victorian courts.

Justice David Beach said he accepted there were “substantial connecting factors” between the case and Germany but that was not enough to grant the application.

”In my view the proceeding also has a substantial connection with Victoria,” Justice Beach said.

“I accept that significant inconvenience will be caused to Grunenthal in being required to defend this proceeding in Victoria. It seems to me that equally significant inconvenience would be suffered by the plaintiff if she was required to litigate the proceeding outside Australia.”

Rowe, 49, is suing Grunenthal, which made thalidomide, a drug responsible for birth defects, in the Supreme Court.

Aachen-based Grunenthal, which employs 4900 people worldwide, was seeking a ruling that it would be burdened by the lawsuit of Ms Rowe, and of hundreds of other severely disabled Australians involved in a class action.

The company argued a number of witnesses it would call were elderly German residents and that the claims are statute barred because of the delay in suing.

In his judgment Justice Beach said it was too early to evaluate the prospects of Ms Rowe being granted an extension to run her case.

He also dismissed an application to throw out the case against two other defendants, Distillers and Diageo, which were licensed to supply thalidomide in Australia.

Justice Beach said Distillers said it was simply a parent company of Australian companies and that under product liability laws Ms Rowe would not be able to prove it was guilty of “negligent omission” in failing to warn consumers of the dangers of thalidomide.

“It cannot be seriously doubted that had her (Ms Rowe’s) mother and/or her medical practitioners been appropriately warned (she) would not have consumed thalidomide drugs and would not have suffered her injuries,” Justice Beach said.

Ms Rowe, of Nunawading, has been cared for by her parents Wendy and Ian, both now nearly 80, since she was born. They have never received compensation.

In her writ she claims that thalidomide was marketed in Australia as safe and non toxic, without significant side effects and suitable for pregnant women, children and babies as an effective treatment for nausea, sleeplessness and anxiety.

She claims says that prior to her birth Grunenthal knew or ought to have known that thalidomide posed a risk to unborn children.

The judge will today set a timetable to have pre-trial issues in the case resolved by early next year.

You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress | Designed by: Premium WordPress Themes | Thanks to Themes Gallery, Bromoney and Wordpress Themes