Australia: Vioxx appeal in Full Federal Court successful

Last Updated: 18 October 2011
Article by Jessica Kinny and Wendy Blacker

On 12 October 2011 the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia, constituted by Chief Justice Keane and Justices Bennett and Gordon JJ (their Honours) allowed an appeal of the Federal Court decision to award compensation to a claimant who claimed consumption of Vioxx caused him to have a heart attack in 2003.

The drug

Vioxx, a "Cox-2" inhibitor, was approved for sale in 1999. Vioxx was an anti-inflammatory drug that was prescribed to patients suffering from the effects of arthritis. At the time the drug was considered revolutionary because, unlike similar medications, the drug did not have any gastrointestinal side-effects.

Merck Sharpe & Dohme Australia (MSDA) withdrew Vioxx on 30 September 2004 after a study showed it doubled the risk of certain cardiovascular adverse events.

The class action

Mr Peterson represented a defined class including all persons who after 30 June 1999 were prescribed Vioxx (in Australia) and who within 30 weeks of consuming Vioxx suffered one or more specific cardiovascular conditions.

Mr Peterson alleged that Vioxx increased the risk of cardiovascular disease and that the distributor MSDA knew or should have known this prior to the drug's voluntary recall in 2004.

The class action was launched against the respondents in 2005 based in negligence and on various alleged breaches of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) (TPA), now the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth).

Mr Peterson was awarded $287,000 in 2010 by Justice Christopher Jessup. His Honour found Mr Peterson was entitled to recover damages pursuant to ss 74B and 74D of the TPA, finding (respectively) that:

  1. Vioxx was not reasonably fit for the purpose implicitly made known to MSDA (i.e. the safe relief of arthritic pain); and
  2. Vioxx was not of merchantable quality because it was reasonable for a consumer to expect that a medication for the relief of arthritic pain would not involve a doubled risk of heart attack.

This finding was made notwithstanding that Justice Jessup also held that MSDA was entitled to the 'state of the art' defence under s 75AK(1)(c) of the TPA.

Mr Peterson also unsuccessfully alleged breaches of ss 52 and 75AD of the TPA, the former failing due to want of causation and the latter failing due to the operation of the 'state of the art' defence.

Did Vioxx cause Mr Peterson's heart attack?

Justice Jessup's ultimately determined that Vioxx had caused Mr Peterson's heart attack.

Counsel for Mr Peterson submitted that his Honour's findings of ultimate fact were sufficient to sustain the judgment. Counsel for MSDA submitted that his Honour's express refusal to find that Mr Peterson's heart attack would not have happened but for the taking of Vioxx meant that Mr Peterson's case should have been dismissed for want of an essential factual finding that it was more probably than not that the consumption of Vioxx caused or materially contributed to the occurrence of his heart attack1.

Their Honours referred to the 'but for' test for causation in Chappel v Hart2 in which Justice McHugh said: ... if a wrongful act or omission results in an increased risk of injury to the plaintiff and that risk eventuates, the defendant's conduct has materially contributed to the injury that the plaintiff suggests whether or not other factors also contributed to that injury occurring...3, and other cases approving the 'but for' test.

Ultimately, their Honours held that it was not sufficiently proven that Mr Paterson's heart attack would not have occurred 'but for' the ingestion of Vioxx in the primary hearing, and therefore Justice Jessup's ultimate findings of fact on causation were not sufficient4. Further, their Honours through their own examination of the evidence produced in the appeal were not convinced that it was more probable than not that the consumption of Vioxx was a necessary condition of Mr Peterson's heart attack, although this might not be the case for other applicants represented in the proceedings5.

The past consumption cross-appeal

Mr Peterson cross-appealed against Justice Jessup's rejection of the submission that past consumption of Vioxx more or less continuously in the past increased the risk of a person suffering a heart attack, even in cases where Vioxx was not consumed in the weeks immediately preceding the occurrence of the heart attack. It was submitted that such consumption might have contributed to Mr Peterson's heart attack by the absorption of thrombi into endothelial plaque.

The significance of rejecting this alternative mechanism was that it restricted the potential pool of representative parties who might bring an action against MSDA.

This argument was rejected by their Honours, who concluded that a causative link had to be established and was not in the primary hearing. Their Honours confirmed that even if there was a plausible explanation that earlier consumption of Vioxx could result in a Vioxx-induced cardiovascular event, this alone does not support a finding that the cardiovascular event in question was caused by Vioxx6.

Negligence and s 52 of the TPA

Although the claim failed for want of causation, Mr Peterson was successful in the primary hearing in establishing that a failure to notify prescribing doctors and the general public of potentially harmful side effects may be considered misleading and deceptive conduct under s52 of the TPA.

His Honour found that MSDA sales representatives did use the product information for Vioxx in their 'sales pitch' to doctors and this would be a promotion activity in relation to, or for the purposes of, the supply of goods or services to actual or potential users of the product7. His Honour also found that these representations – which did not include a safety warning based on the results of the VIGOR trial – were likely to mislead or deceive.

On appeal, MSDA contended that the finding of a breach was reached unfairly, as the focus ofa breach was reached unfairly, as the focus of Mr Peterson's case was the adequacy of the warning conveyed by the amendment to the Vioxx product information, not the adequacy of the means by which that information was conveyed to medical practitioners. This was accepted by their Honours, who again left open the opportunity for other members of the represented group who might make out this element of their case8.

MSDA also argued that the regulatory regime based on the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 (Cth) precluded the possibility of common law obligations co-existing with the legislation, but their Honours rejected this submission.

Sections 74B and 74D of the TPA

On appeal, MSDA successfully challenged Justice Jessup's finding that Mr Peterson was entitled to recover damages pursuant to these sections. Their Honours held that Mr Peterson did not establish that he suffered loss or damage by reason of otherwise actionable conduct on the part of MSDA for a breadth of evidentiary reasons9.

In answer to s 74B, their Honours held that the purpose for which Vioxx was acquired did not include: ... as a negative element of that purpose, some quality of absolute safety or complete absence of adverse side effect10. In addition, even if the proposition that Vioxx doubled the risk of Mr Peterson having a heart attack (which it was not), it was not relevant unless that negative element was properly made out.11

In effect, their Honours stated that it could not be presumed in law that Mr Peterson acquired Vioxx for a particular purpose which included the purpose of not exposing himself to other life-threatening conditions.

In answer to s 74D, their Honours held that a consumer must suffer loss or damage by reason that the goods are not of merchantable quality and, as their Honours were not convinced that it was more probable than not that the consumption of Vioxx was a necessary precondition of Mr Peterson's heart attack, liability could not be made out12.

Section 75AD of the TPA

The effect of s75AD is intended to be that any individual who is injured by a defective good13 can recover from the good's manufacturer or importer14.

MSDA appealed against the Justice Jessup's finding that Vioxx was 'defective' within the meaning of s 75AD of the TPA. Mr Peterson cross-appealed Justice Jessup's orders dismissing the s 75AD claim.

Their Honours rejected the appeal and cross-appeal.

Section 75AK(1)(c): state of the art defence

Mr Peterson cross-appealed against Justice Jessup's conclusions in relation to the availability of the defence under s 75AK(1)(c), submitting that the defence cannot apply if, at the time of supply, the defect had already been discovered. Mr Peterson submitted that his Honour should have found that the defect in Vioxx had been discovered by no later than March 2000, when the results of the first study (the VIGOR study) were released.

Their Honours ruled against Mr Peterson, stating that: ... the state of scientific knowledge at the time... was not just the results of the VIGOR study but the conclusions to be drawn from it15. Their Honours held that the state of scientific or technical knowledge at the time the drug was supplied to Mr Peterson was not sufficient to enable MSDA to know of the defects or risks posed, so the defect was not discoverable16.

The significance of the appeal

The 'state of the art defence' under s 75AK of the TPA (now s 142 Australian Consumer Law) operates for an important policy reason: to encourage innovation in the pharmaceutical industry by protecting those innovators from liability for defects that human knowledge, research and foresight could not have prevented.

The effect of Justice Jessup's judgment was that it appeared to allow a manufacturer to escape liability for a defective product under the 'state of the art' defence, only to allow the claim to be revived once more by a finding that there was an implied manufacturers' warranty, which imposed a strict liability on the manufacturer.

The judgment steps away from this interpretation.


1 Merck Sharp & Dohme (Australia) Pty Ltd v Peterson [2011] FCAFC 128 at 93.
2 (1998) 195 CLR 232.
3 (1998) 195 CLR 232 at [27].
4Merck Sharp & Dohme (Australia) Pty Ltd v Peterson [2011] FCAFC 128 at 104-105.
5Merck Sharp & Dohme (Australia) Pty Ltd v Peterson [2011] FCAFC 128 at 126.
6Merck Sharp & Dohme (Australia) Pty Ltd v Peterson [2011] FCAFC 128 at 143.
72010 judgmentat 604
8Merck Sharp & Dohme (Australia) Pty Ltd v Peterson [2011] FCAFC 128 at 159.
9Merck Sharp & Dohme (Australia) Pty Ltd v Peterson [2011] FCAFC 128 at 165.
10Merck Sharp & Dohme (Australia) Pty Ltd v Peterson [2011] FCAFC 128 at 172.
11Merck Sharp & Dohme (Australia) Pty Ltd v Peterson [2011] FCAFC 128 at 173.
12Merck Sharp & Dohme (Australia) Pty Ltd v Peterson [2011] FCAFC 128 at 179.
13Defined under s75AC Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth).
14s75AB Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth).
15Merck Sharp & Dohme (Australia) Pty Ltd v Peterson [2011] FCAFC 128 at 207.
16Merck Sharp & Dohme (Australia) Pty Ltd v Peterson [2011] FCAFC 128 at 208.

For more information, please contact:


Wendy Blacker

t (02) 9931 4922



Lionel Appelboom

t (03) 8738 6061


This report does not comprise legal advice and neither Gadens Lawyers nor the authors accept any responsibility for it.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Mondaq Advice Centre (MACs)
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.