Holsen is a senior physician at the skin department at Haukeland Hospital in Bergen. He was also when he took the flu vaccine in 2015. But he fell ill and was 60 per cent disabled. After a long fight for justice and compensation, but rejection from both the Norwegian Patient Injury Compensation Board (NPE) and the Patient Injury Board, he sued the state. Nine years after he took the flu vaccine, just before the case was due to appear in Hordland district court this week, the state withdrew. Now they acknowledge liability. A big burden – The time that has passed has been a burden in itself. It has taken a disproportionately long time to run this case. It has been a big burden, quite clearly, says Holsen to news. Lawyer Helge Husebye Haug is critical of the long processing time in patient injury cases. Holsen’s lawyer, Helge Husebye Haug, says the long processing time is objectionable. – This is a significant fair play problem. Bainca Reichelt is a lawyer for the Patient Injury Board. She has a great understanding that the use of time is taxing. – I think it must be very taxing. At the same time, it is important to us that this is correct. And then it is important to emphasize that it is not because he is a healthcare professional that the state has acknowledged responsibility. – Why does the state acknowledge responsibility now? – We are doing this because new evidence came to light in connection with the lawsuit which showed that this vaccine is to be seen as a recommended vaccine for Holsen. We had to investigate whether it was correct that this vaccine had been recommended for him. This was not made clear until a month ago. Holsen denies that this is new information. – This is something I claimed early on. Fight and rematch Relieved, but still upset, Dag Holsen registers the state’s withdrawal. He has spent time and energy in battles and rematches. – It has been a bit strange to see how this game has been. But all in all, perhaps I feel that I have been privileged. That it has been a strength that I have been able to read at least the medical, if not the legal, game in this. – Do you feel that the state is fighting to win in the same way as you are fighting to win? – Yes, I feel that quite clearly. And especially as long as this with healthcare personnel and the recommended vaccine was a central part of the case. Then I feel that the state has strong vested interests that they are fighting for. Dag Holsen is currently partially disabled, but is still a senior physician at the skin department at Haukeland Hospital in Bergen. Photo: Oskar Rennedal / news Took the recommended vaccine In 2015, Dag Holsen did as he had done in all previous years, and as most healthcare personnel do: He followed the clear recommendation from both the Directorate of Health and the Institute of Public Health to take the flu vaccine. Dag Holsen has been faithful to this recommendation since he qualified as a doctor in 1988. After a while he fell ill, and it did not go away. Later, an MRI showed that he had arthritis. He is still convinced that the recommended vaccine was the cause of the outbreak. But when Holsen demanded compensation, the state replied that the recommended vaccine was not recommended, despite the fact that it was. And the Patient Injury Act is clear that there must be a low threshold for providing compensation to persons who become ill after taking the recommended vaccine. Acknowledging responsibility After much back and forth, he appealed the NPE’s refusal to the Patient Injury Board, which also rejected the claim for compensation. Together with lawyer Helge Husebye Haug, Holsen summoned the state for the Hordaland District Court last year: The trial was scheduled for 9 December this year. But in November, an e-mail was sent to lawyer Helge Husebye Haug in which the state acknowledges responsibility, and the main proceedings in Hordaland district court in Bergen were thus cancelled. Although the state acknowledges liability for damages, the state does not acknowledge that the vaccine is the cause of Holsen’s arthritis shortly after vaccination in 2015. Does not acknowledge that the vaccine led to arthritis In an email to news, lawyer Bianca Reichelt, who is handling the case before the patient compensation board, writes, that it has not been proven that vaccines can trigger arthritis. – There is no research to support this. The Supreme Court has said that this is not decisive for the right to compensation in the vaccine cases. It must also be practically possible that the vaccine can trigger the condition. The boundary between what is practically possible and what is only theoretically possible is not entirely easy to define. She refers to the special evidence rules that apply to recommended vaccines. – We must assume that the vaccine is the cause of an injury unless the state can prove that this is most likely not the case. As a result of specific circumstances in this case, it is our assessment that we would not be able to meet this burden of proof. It was then right to acknowledge liability when new evidence came to light that showed that the vaccine was to be considered as recommended for Holsen, writes Reichelt Important with recommended vaccine – This case shows how important it is that a vaccine is recommended. Without being on the list as a recommended vaccine, it is almost impossible to get compensation for vaccine damage, says lawyer Helge Husebye Haug to news. The case is now, nine years after the stabbing that sent Dag Holsen partially out of working life, moving on to the assessment of compensation, but it is unclear when this will be ready, and how large the compensation will be. Published 13.12.2024, at 06.35
ttn-69
