Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.Dhandapani
Asif Riaz – Appellant
Versus
Government of India Rep. By its Secretary Ministry of Health & Family Welfare Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's claim due to vaccine adverse effects. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. petitioner's arguments about adverse reactions. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. respondents' defense on safety of the vaccine. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. court's observations on informed consent. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 5. legal interpretation of 'serious adverse events'. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 6. court's conclusion on causation between vaccine and adverse events. (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 7. court's final ruling against the petitioner's claims. (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43) |
| 8. dismissal of the petition for lack of merit. (Para 44) |
ORDER :
M. Dhandapani, J.
The side effects caused by the vaccine “COVIDSHIELD” for which the petitioner, as a volunteer, stood for human trial, and resultantly suffered neurological complications of the said vaccine resulting in adverse effects on the daily life of the petitioner, has led to the filing of the present writ petition for declaration to declare the said vaccine “COVIDSHIELD” as unsafe for humans and also for compensation for the damage caused to the petitioner.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that
The court ruled that adverse effects experienced by a trial participant were not directly attributable to the vaccine and emphasized the importance of informed consent in clinical trials.
The court established that the right to health under Article 21 includes a State obligation to provide a compensation framework for adverse events following vaccination, emphasizing no-fault liabilit....
The main legal principle established is the interpretation of the Scheme to provide financial assistance to health workers who lost their lives on account of Covid-19 related duties, widening the def....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the imposition of mandatory RT-PCR testing for unvaccinated employees and the denial of free Covid-19 treatment by MPT were reasonable and ....
Vaccine reaction – In absence of medical evidence, Courts on their own will lack expertise to come to a conclusion, more particularly in a case of present nature where cause itself is required to be ....
The court ruled that formal documentation is not strictly necessary for ex gratia compensation if the employee's duties inherently involved exposure to Covid-19, especially during the pandemic.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
