E-mail this to a friend
Print this
Potential blood transfusion claims for British soldiers
10 January 2008
News emerged today of 18 British soldiers who received unscreened blood after being injured in combat. Media speculation has mentioned the possibility of legal action.
James Bell, partner in the Clinical Negligence team, is currently pursuing similar claims for claimants who have been injured due to transfusion errors in UK hospitals.
The 18 servicemen received emergency blood transfusions at American field hospitals after being seriously wounded in the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
It emerged that some batches were not properly screened for infections such as HIV and hepatitis. The soldiers must now wait for the results of medical tests to find out whether they have been affected.
Under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 UK patients have a right to compensation if they have been injured by a defective product or drug. This is a strict liability claim. This means that the claimants must simply show that they have received a “defective product” and have been injured by it.
If the incident had occurred in a UK hospital then the soldiers could have brought claims Under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 against the hospital concerned.
As the transfusions took place at US field hospitals in Iraq or Afghanistan then it is likely that the British soldiers would have to look to the US courts if they wished to pursue a claim for damages. There may be some issues regarding sovereign immunity of the United States government. This means that the US government could deny it owes any liability to the UK claimants at all despite the obvious errors.”
Clinical negligence Fact Sheet