A law firm based in Kildare has lodged over 30 personal injury cases on behalf of people who claim they have suffered significant injuries as a result of Covid-19 vaccines.
Liam Moloney, Managing partner at Moloney and Co Solicitors in Naas, Co Kildare, said that in a minority of cases of Covid vaccination, people can suffer a “significant adverse reaction.” Speaking to Gript, Mr Moloney said that legal action was necessary because the State currently has no compensation scheme in place for individuals who want to make a claim. The only remedy available to those who are injured, at present, is to pursue legal action against the state, according to the solicitor.
“There is no alternative at present but to sue the State. It is regrettable,” Mr Moloney said. The Kildare lawyer added that his clients are seeking financial compensation for significant, and in some cases “life-changing” injuries.
Those who have contacted the law firm and are being represented have suffered heart conditions including myocarditis and pericarditis, skin reactions, Guillain-Barré Syndrome. Bell’s Palsy, strokes, and SIRVA – a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration.
The solicitor said that there was a failure, on behalf of the State, to warn recipients of potential injuries that could be caused by vaccination, as well as a failure to provide sufficient information prior to vaccination regarding the risks associated with the different types of Covid vaccine. Mr Moloney pointed out that this relates only to the risks which were known at the time the vaccines were rolled out.
“The producer, or any potential defendant, does not have a duty to warn against risks that were not known at that particular time. My clients are claiming that the HSE, as the main defendant, were aware of certain risks associated with different vaccinations and failed to warn them of those risks,” He believes it is the case that informed consent was not secured for many of the individuals he is representing who received the Covid vaccine.”
He added that under Article 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights that injured Irish citizens are entitled to an adequate remedy for their injuries and this should be in the form of a no-fault compensation scheme.
“There is also a product liability claim. If a plaintiff can prove that they were supplied with an unsafe and defective product, they are entitled to succeed in their claim as strict liability applies . These cases are being contested by the State but will be vigorously pursued by the injured clients . Full defences have been filed by the State and the next stage will be the discovery stage. “
Explaining the legal action, Mr Money said: “Ultimately, a judge will look at all aspects of a plaintiff’s claim, such as if somebody had an uneventful medical history, and then within a very short time of vaccination, developed an adverse reaction and significant medical issues, a court can look at that and draw an inference from all of that. There are also arguments in terms of the science, and the scientific evidence continues to develop.
“The recent decisions from the European Court do favour plaintiffs. These are ultimately product liability cases, and the burden of proof is on the individual who claims they have been injured by the vaccine, who must prove, on the balance of probability, that the product was unsafe. There is also the issue of the lack of informed consent, however this is a subjective test for a judge to decide one way or another if an individual was properly warned of the risks of developing certain illnesses, and secondly, can the individual prove that the specific batch of the vaccine itself was unsafe.”
Mr Moloney says that medical professionals, nurses and pharmacists who administered Covid vaccinations had certain legal duties to uphold.
“There are legal duties and responsibilities attached. Ultimately, I do not agree that anyone would take legal action if they suffered a minor injury. I would not advise action like this for minor side effects. It is true to say that everyone accepts minor side effects such as headaches or dizziness, for the greater good when it comes to vaccination. Ultimately I am in favour of the vaccination programme, but this is about providing a fair compensation scheme for the very small minority of people who unfortunately go on to sustain significant medical injuries and problems following vaccination. A compensation scheme is something which supports the system of vaccination in any State.”
FAILURE TO PUBLISH TERMS OF COMPENSATION SCHEME
“There are a plethora of side effects associated with different types of vaccines. AstraZeneca, in particular, was associated with myocarditis and pericarditis, which is an inflammation of the heart muscle. We have quite a number of those cases. Those side effects were risks associated with that vaccine which were known at a particular time. That vaccine was subsequently pulled in Ireland,” Mr Moloney added.
“We also have an issue regarding the State’s and the Department of Health’s failure to publish the terms of a Covid vaccine compensation scheme. It had been confirmed by the previous Minister for Health, and we had assurances that such a scheme was being prepared. We await the publication of the terms of the scheme, which will hopefully mirror similar schemes in place in the UK. If a redress scheme is published, then it may be the case that litigation will not have to be pursued, depending on the terms of the scheme. Most redress schemes provide an alternative – you can continue litigation, or you can opt into the terms of the scheme.
“That has been the previous form here in Ireland in terms of other redress schemes. We do not have a class action system where the liability is decided in one case, and then there’s a class settlement. Each case is tried on its own merits, so unless there is a finding from a higher court, such as the Supreme Court, you’re not bound by it. It is the scenario that two High Court judges could ultimately make different decisions in a vaccine damage case.
“There’s litigation going on at present in Switzerland, Belgium and in France. However, most European countries have a vaccine compensation scheme. Litigation is only taking place, essentially, where a completely inadequate scheme exists. There is significant stress and cost involved for individuals in pursuing litigation. The risks and costs involved in litigation are high. It is unfair that people feel forced down this route in the absence of a proper, functioning scheme.”
Government schemes exist in the UK, and there have been calls for a similar scheme here since as early as 2020. In February, Minister for Health Jennifer Carroll MacNeill said that the Department of Health is working to develop a model for a vaccine damage scheme and officials in the department are working through related policy matters. The Minister for Health said that once the model is developed, it will be brought to Cabinet for discussion and consideration.
“I believe that Minister MacNeill, who is a very effective politician, will drive through the implementation of this scheme, and I believe that she will do right by vaccine injury victims in this State,” Mr Moloney said.
To date, the State’s medical regulator, the HPRA, has received a total of 21,374 reports describing suspected side effects in association with COVID-19 vaccines, of which 2,846 were received in 2022, 399 were received in 2023, 212 were received in 2024, and 35 were received in 2025.
The State is contesting liability, meaning that it is defending the cases. When the State bought Covid vaccines from manufacturers, it assumed indemnity, meaning that it took on legal responsibility.
The HSE states that both myocarditis and pericarditis are “very rare” side effects from the Covid vaccine, claiming that the inflammatory heart conditions can affect roughly every one in 10,000 people after vaccination.
The health service notes that the risk of these very rare conditions is higher in young men, and says such conditions are more likely to happen after the second dose of the primary course of the vaccine – with most cases “having been seen within 14 days of getting the vaccine.” Regarding “extremely rare” side effects, the HSE says: “We do not know yet how many people are affected by extremely rare side effects. There is not enough data available at this time.”
However, it points out that extremely rare side effects include: a severe allergic reaction (anaphylaxis), extensive swelling of the limb where you got your vaccine, and tingling or prickling sensation, or loss of sensation in some part of the body. The HSE also notes that those who have facial fillers “may develop swelling of their face” and also notes erythema multiforme as a very rare side effect – a skin reaction that causes red spots or patches on the skin. Heavy menstrual bleeding (periods) are also noted as a potential side effect.
In response to a request for comment, the HSE said: “The State Claims Agency (SCA) has a statutory remit to manage personal injury claims on behalf of State Authorities. The Minister has no role in determining how claims/cases are conducted and for that reason she cannot comment on individual cases.
“Department of Health officials have completed significant work to develop a model for a vaccine damage scheme and are working through related policy matters. The model has been considered by the Minister for Health and will be brought to Cabinet for further consideration shortly.”
The State Claims Agency confirmed to Gript that to date, it has been notified of 80 COVID-19 vaccine claims.