Here at McCarthy + Co Solicitors, our team of legal experts have extensive experience in bringing claims against manufacturers who have produced defective medical products. If you have suffered a debilitating injury as a result of being fitted with a defective device, you may be wondering if you have a basis to make a claim against the manufacturer. On this page, you will find some general guidance relating to defective medical products and the criteria for making a claim.
Our experience in investigating defective product claims
Medical negligence and product liability claims are overseen by our head litigation lawyer, John McCarthy. John has acted in a wide variety of personal injury, wrongful death, medical negligence and defective medical product cases at Circuit Court, High Court and Supreme Court level.
In the past, John has acted for dozens of victims who have been fitted with defective devices to treat medical conditions. In the early to mid-2010s, he brought multiple successful claims against DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc following the worldwide recall of their ASR XL acetabular total hip replacement system. More recently, John has been assisting litigants who have been fitted with defective DePuy Attune Knee Systems.
Bringing a defective medical product claim
Medical product liability is governed by a separate piece of European legislation implemented in Ireland under the Liability for Defective Products Act, 1991.
One of the big considerations in the context of defective product claims, as opposed to claims in negligence, is that there is a three-year limitation period rather than two years in the case of most other claims.
Defective product claims are made in what is referred to as a strict liability regime, which means that if you can show that the injury was caused by the product, you don’t have to show negligence or provide proof of the nature of the defect, the liability follows automatically.
While there is a three year liability period, there is a ten-year backstop, where if the product has been in circulation on the market for 10 years or more, then no liability attaches. In those circumstances, the question arises as to what “in circulation” actually means. You could have a situation where you have a medical device that was developed 20 years ago and if you were to rely on that date as the one that was first released on the market, then you’d be precluded from relying on the Liability for Defective Products Act. However, the better view appears to be that it’s the actual date when the individual product in question was first acquired on the market, i.e. sold to a consumer or put into use as part of a service or procedure.
Product liability is beneficial in so far as (a) its strict regulatory regime and (b), you’ve got a longer limitation period.
If you, or a member of your family, have suffered as a result of a defective medical device, contact our specialist solicitors today for further advice on how to go about instigating your claim.
Examples of products we have brought claims against
About McCarthy + Co
With more than 30 years of experience in dealing with medical negligence and product liability claims, McCarthy + Co. has expertise in a wide variety of fields including faulty and defective medical devices. We are a family-run business, who pride ourselves on offering honest, impartial and helpful advice.
Our offices are based in Dublin and Cork, but we have worked with clients throughout Ireland in locations ranging from Galway to Waterford. You can count on us for legal advice, guidance and assistance on any form of personal injury.
If you are currently experiencing issues with a medical device that you have had fitted, get in touch with our specialist defective productive claims solicitors today to make a start on your claim or gather more information. Call us on 1800 390 555 and an experienced member of staff will discuss your situation and potential next steps. You can also email on firstname.lastname@example.org and we will get back to you as soon as we can.
In contentious business, a legal practitioner shall not charge any amount in respect of legal costs expressed as a percentage or proportion of any damages (or other moneys) that may become payable to his or her client or purport to set out the legal costs to be charged to a junior counsel as a specified percentage or proportion of the legal costs paid to a senior counsel. A legal practitioner shall not without the prior written agreement of his or her client deduct or appropriate any amount in respect of legal costs from the amount of any damages or moneys that become payable to the client in respect of legal services that the legal practitioner provided to the client.