1 October 2003
DECISION TO REMOVE FUNDING FOR MMR
LITIGATION UPHELD ON APPEAL
The Legal Services Commission's (LSC's)
decision to remove funding for the Measles,
Mumps and Rubella (MMR) litigation was upheld
by a Funding Review Committee at a hearing
yesterday.The Funding Review Committee is an
independent body, made up of solicitors and
barristers from private practice. The Funding
Review Committee that heard the MMR appeal
consisted of an eminent Queens Counsel
barrister and solicitors who are experts in
this area.
The parents involved in this action believe
the MMR vaccine has injured their children.
It is clear to see that the children are
suffering from a number of conditions, most
seriously, regressive autism or a new type of
bowel disease. These illnesses are severe and
of sufficient wider public interest to
justify the LSC's significant investment of
£15million in this case.
Despite this investment, medical research has
yet to prove a conclusive link between the
MMR vaccine and Autistic Spectrum Disorder.
Additionally, no link has been proven by any
other medical body. There remains no
acceptance within the worldwide medical
authorities that MMR causes the symptoms seen
in these children. Therefore, the litigation
is very likely to fail. It would not be
correct to spend a further £10million of
public money funding a trial that is very
unlikely to succeed.
Clare Dodgson, Chief Executive of the LSC
said: "I appreciate that this decision
will come as a great disappointment to the
parents involved. I sympathise with their
situation. Their children are clearly ill and
they genuinely believe the MMR vaccine caused
their illnesses. However, this litigation is
very unlikely to prove their suspicions. It
would be wrong to raise their hopes
unreasonably by proceeding with this
litigation." All the research paid for
by the LSC will be sent to the Medical
Research Council who are investigating the
causes of autism.
Notes to Editors
1. The Legal Services Commission is
responsible for providing legal aid for
Multi-Party Actions, providing the
individuals involved meet our financial means
test and the case has good legal merits.
2. The LSC, formerly the Legal Aid Board, has
funded the MMR litigation since 1992. The
funding provided has primarily been spent on
research into the medical link between the
children's symptoms and the MMR vaccine.
3. The MMR case has been brought under the
Consumer Protection Act 1987, on the basis
that MMR is a defective product and should
not have been used. There is a limit of 10
years on the time in which an action can be
brought under the Consumer Protection Act.
Therefore, it was necessary to start court
proceedings before the medical research had
concluded. The court has scheduled a 6 month
trial starting in April 2004, where the
possible link between MMR and the children's
symptoms will be tried.
4. Under the Legal Aid Act 1988 the LSC is
obliged to withdraw funding where a case no
longer meets the legal merits test. Cases
must have reasonable prospects of success,
and the cost of the action must be
reasonable, compared with the potential
damages. If funding is withdrawn by the LSC,
any legally aided individual has a right of
appeal to a Funding Review Committee.
5. This was the first case in which research
had been funded by legal aid. In retrospect,
it was not effective or appropriate for the
LSC to fund research. The courts are not the
place to prove new medical truths. The
Medical Research Council (MRC) is the
appropriate body to investigate the cause of
these children's illnesses. The latest MRC
report on autism states that the causes
"remain, to a large extent,
unidentified". The MRC are looking for
research into the medical
"mechanisms" causing autism.
27 February 2004
JUDICIAL REVIEW AGAINST MMR FUNDING
DECISION DISMISSED
In the High Court today, Mr Justice Davis has
dismissed the judicial review against the
Legal Services Commission’s decision to
remove legal aid for the MMR litigation. The
judicial review was brought by Alexander
Harris solicitors on behalf of a child whose
parents believe he was harmed by the MMR
vaccine. That child is part of the larger
group action known as the MMR litigation.
The Legal Services Commission (LSC) withdrew
funding for the MMR litigation on 29
September 2003 on the grounds that the
litigation, which was seeking to establish a
link between MMR and autism or bowel disease
did not have any reasonable prospect of
success. On 30 September 2003, this decision
was supported by a Funding Review Committee,
an independent appeal body, made up of an
eminent Queens Counsel barrister and three
expert solicitors.
Clare Dodgson, Chief Executive of the LSC,
said: “I welcome today’s judgement.
I was always satisfied our decision and that
of the Funding Review Committee was correct.
I have every sympathy for the parents. Their
children are clearly ill and they genuinely
believe the MMR vaccine caused their
illnesses. However, I am not convinced that
legal action is the best way of deciding this
matter. Any more legal challenges will drag
out the process, which could ultimately
result in further distress for the
families.”
Notes to editors
1. The Legal Services Commission (LSC) is
responsible for providing legal aid for
Multi-Party Actions, providing the
individuals involved meet our financial means
test and the case has good legal merits.
2. Under the Legal Aid Act 1988, the LSC is
obliged to withdraw funding where a case no
longer meets the legal merits test. Cases
must have reasonable prospects of success and
the cost of the action must be reasonable,
compared to the potential damages. When the
LSC withdraws funding, any legally aided
individual has a right of appeal to a Funding
Review Committee