A group of lawyers are launching a class action over defective trans-vaginal mesh devices which have caused women worldwide to suffer.
The decision to launch the class action follows a legal victory in Australia two years ago.
Trans-vaginal mesh are net-like medical devices that doctors use to repair weakened or damaged tissue in a woman’s bladder or pelvic area. The word trans-vaginal refers to the surgical technique doctors use to implant the mesh through a vagina.
RH Lawyers and Richard Spoor Attorneys will bring the medical lawsuit against Coloplast, the Nu-Angle Group, Johnson & Johnson, Ethicon and Ashanti Medical.
Zain Lundell, a class action specialist at RH lawyers, said thousands of South Africans deserve justice, after the devices which were supposed to make their lives more comfortable, brought them pain.
“We are going ahead with the class action. This is due to the rising concerns over the use of pelvic mesh devices following complications suffered by a number of women who have been implanted with the devices,” Lundell said in an interview with Business Day.
“The decision comes in light of a landmark ruling out of the Federal Court of Australia in November 2019, wherein it was found that Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiaries Ethicon Sarl and Ethicon had, among other things, misled patients and surgeons about the risks associated with their pelvic mesh products,” he said.
A full bench of the Federal Court of Australia in March 2021 affirmed this ruling and dismissed an appeal by Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiaries regarding the ruling.
It is unknown how many women in SA have been affected by problems with the pelvic mesh devices but it was used and sold in both the public and private sectors and continues to be used in these sectors.
“Based on the number of pelvic mesh surgeries we have received from medical aid companies, we estimate at least 1,000 women are affected,” said Lundell.
But Ethicon said in response to questions by Business Day that risks could occur and no class actions were pending around its pelvic mesh products.
“Patient safety is our first priority. Pelvic mesh has helped improve the quality of life for millions of women with stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse,” it said.
“Scientists from around the world who have conducted and reviewed independent research on pelvic mesh agree it is an important treatment option for women. All surgical pelvic floor procedures — with and without the use of mesh — come with the risk of developing complications,” it said.
It said Ethicon acted ethically and responsibly in the research, development and supply of these products and the majority of women with pelvic mesh see an improvement in their day-to-day lives.
Richard Spoor Attorneys has spearheaded the drive to bring class actions to SA, starting with silicosis, tuberculosis and listeriosis class actions.
In a typical class action, a plaintiff sues a defendant or a number of defendants on behalf of a group, or a class, of absent parties. This differs from a traditional lawsuit, where one party sues another single party, and all of the parties are present in court.
Lundell said class actions had not been common in SA because they were a complex area of law which required expertise which was generally not readily available in SA. They were also very expensive cases to run, which created further issues.
But he said he and his team of lawyers were well-prepared for the medical class action.
“Many of our lawyers working on the mesh class action have had experience working on the listeriosis class action against Tiger Brands Ltd & 2 Others, the Steinhoff class action following the Steinhoff scandal as well as a class action against Volkswagen over its ‘clean diesel’ emissions scandal,” he said.
The class action could be worth millions of rand. It involves five plaintiffs instituting class action proceedings in their representative capacity as class representatives of specified cases.
“At this stage we have not quantified the damages of our clients. In the Australian class action lawsuit, however, Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiaries were ordered to pay three women a total of $1.7m plus legal costs as compensation,” Lundell said.
He said the companies involved had been served legal papers.
Lundell said his team was focused on achieving justice for its clients, who have “suffered serious debilitating injuries at the hands of these pharmaceutical giants more concerned with their bottom line than the safety and efficacy of their products”.
“Be it in the form of settlement or trial proceedings, justice must be attained,” he said.
andersona@businesslive.co.za
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.