A major pharmaceutical group has asked the High Court for an order preventing the continuation of an action against it by a man who claims his 20-year-old son's suicide was a side-effect of the boy's taking a drug manufactured by the group which is used in the treatment of acne.
The court was told Mr Liam Grant, who is suing on his own behalf and on behalf of other family members, has turned down an offer of some €37,000, made without admission of liability, for mental distress and funeral expenses.
Mr Grant, his solicitor said, wanted to have the issue of liability determined because he believed the alleged wrongful actions of the defendants had caused or contributed to the death of his son, also named Liam.
He was also seeking some €700,000 to meet the costs of medical and scientific research which he had carried out.
Mr Grant (58), Wainsfort Manor Drive, Terenure, Dublin, has brought the case against Roche Products (Ireland) Ltd, Clonskeagh, Dublin, a number of other Roche companies, and the Irish Medicines Board, who deny the claims.
It is alleged by Mr Grant that the suicide of his son Liam, who had acne, arose from or was caused or contributed to by the negligence of the Roche organisation in the manufacture of a drug sold here under the name Roaccutane and their failure to give proper advice and warnings in respect of its use. Liam died on June 15th, 1997.
The defendants are seeking an order staying Mr Grant's proceedings or alternatively restraining their continuation on grounds that, given an open offer made last October, the relief being sought has been offered. The group argues continuation of the case would be an abuse of the court process.
Today, the President of the High Court, Mr Justice Finnegan, was told that, in September last, the Roche side had made an offer to Mr Grant to settle the action for some €30,990 for mental distress and €5,595 for funeral expenses.
It was made clear by the Roche side that the offer was being made in full and final settlement of all claims against the defendants and strictly without admission of liability. Solicitors for Mr Grant replied later that month rejecting the offer, describing it as "a cynical attempt" to "avoid a public trial in relation to its wrongful conduct concerning the drug Roaccutane."