Johnson & Johnson convicted for his talc

The American Pharmaceutical Group Johnson & Johnson Johnson (J & J) was sentenced on Thursday, July 12, to pay $ 4.69 billion in damages in a lawsuit filed by 22 women and their families, who were accused of producing talc sold by the group for causing cancer. they were victims. This is a new twist in this case for which several thousand lawsuits have been filed against J & J.

According to the lawyer representing the victims, Mark Lanier, a jury composed of six men and Six women in a St. Louis, Missouri court decided to sentence the drug group after six weeks of trial and eight hours of deliberations. The damages consist of $ 550 million in compensatory damages and more than $ 4.1 billion in punitive damages.

The complainants baderted that the use of talc for their personal hygiene had caused ovarian cancer. "For more than 40 years, Johnson & Johnson has concealed evidence of the presence of asbestos in its products" accused Mr. Lanier in a statement. "We hope this verdict will attract the attention of J & J's Board of Directors and encourage them to better inform the medical community and the public of the link between asbestos, talc and ovarian cancer" he continued, asking the pharmaceutical group to withdraw the products concerned from the market.

The defense speaks of "prejudices"

In a statement, J & J said "Deeply disappointed by the verdict" . The latter "results from an unfair process that saw the plaintiffs represent a group of 22 women, most of whom have no connection with Missouri but who were gathered in one case and all claiming that they developed ovarian cancer " said the group. "The verdict, which awarded the same amount of damages to each of the complainants irrespective of their individual case and legal differences, reflects the fact that the evidence presented in this case could not withstand the prejudices inherent in this case. kind of instruction ".

J & J reaffirmed that the talc it markets does not contain asbestos and does not cause ovarian cancer, stating its intention to resort "To all the appeal proceedings at its disposal"

Several trials have already been held for the same reasons and a Court of Appeal of Los Angeles (California) had ruled in particular last October against & J by dismissing a judgment of $ 417 million in damages, finding that the complainant's arguments were insufficient and vague.