Carolyn Challis has been refused an ex-gratia payment because
she became infected as a result of the transfusions received after
the September 1991 cut-off date of the government's scheme to
compensate victims of the infected blood scandal.
The Department of Health argues that after this date the National
Health Service had in place a system to screen all blood
transfusions for Hepatits C infection.
Only people who became infected as a result of the transfusions
received before the September 1991 date qualify for the
£20,000 payment.
Represented by Leigh Day solicitors, Carolyn has issued a claim in
the high court for judicial review of the Secretary of State for
Health and Social Care's decision to stick with the 1991 date
when all ex-gratia payments schemes were rolled into one in
November, 2017.
Carolyn, a 64-year-old mother of three adult children, believes she
was infected with Hepatitis C as a result of the transfusions
received between March 1992 and July 1993 from one of the blood
transfusions she received as part of the many medical interventions
for her cancer.
The virus has had such a debilitating impact that it has cost her
her family life. She describes living in a "brain fog"
with chronic fatigue and experiencing periods of being completely
incapacitated over 10 years.
Carolyn is a core participant in the ongoing Infected Blood Inquiry
(IBI) under the chairmanship of Sir Brian Langstaff which is due to
resume hearings on Tuesday, 22 September when Sir David Owen will
be giving evidence.
Carolyn's story and her evidence to the inquiry can be
found here.
Her lawyers argue that the 1991 cut off is wrong because some blood
and blood products that entered the NHS system prior to September
1991 were stored by NHS bodies and not used for patients until a
period of months and the first- and second-generation HCV-antibody
testing processes used to test proposed blood donor were not as
accurate or sophisticated as later testing systems.
Her grounds for judicial review are:
Mistake of Fact
Irrationality and/or breach of the common law duty to act
equally.
Discrimination issues
Indirect Age Discrimination
The Public Sector Equality Duty
Leigh Day partner Emma
Jones said:
"The reasons for sticking with the September 1991 cut-off date
for eligibility for ex-gratia payments under the infected blood
compensation scheme are clearly mistaken for the reasons we have
outlined, and wrong in law. We are hopeful that Carolyn will be
given permission for judicial review of the Health Secretary's
decision and that the decision will be ruled unlawful and therefore
overturned so that all those who have been infected as a result of
this scandal will be eligible to receive an ex-gratia
payment."
Leigh Day has been working with individuals who have been infected or affected by contaminated blood for a number of years. We heard evidence during the first phase of the hearings from a number of individuals who have been refused payment because of the cut off date. If this JR succeeds it will benefit many individuals.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.