EU suing AZ

[Baileysforchristmas]

Do you think it’s a good idea to sue a non profit vaccine producer in the middle of a pandemic? Especially when it’s in the contract the EU can’t sue for late delivery

www.politico.eu/article/belgium-was-warned-eus-astrazeneca-contract-lacked-teeth-documents/

I don't feel sorry for the legal teams at all. They will be earning huge sums of money, and will be the only winners from this sorry mess.

The EU won't get a single extra vaccine from it.

Az will waste time, energy and money defending it's fulfillment of a not for profit contract, which may impact on vaccine production elsewhere.

No manufacturer will ever make a not for profit vaccine again.

On the plus sides, it will be endlessly entertaining for the geeks of us who enjoy legal debate. And it might provide a smokescreen for some of the politicians involved, which is I suspect the main reason behind this.

@RafaIsTheKingOfClay I don’t think the EU want to settle out of court, they want to prove a point .

I’ve taken AZ as a 51 year old female and I feel privileged and relieved to have had it, I can’t wait for my 2nd one, hopefully soon.

@Motorina

I don't feel sorry for the legal teams at all. They will be earning huge sums of money, and will be the only winners from this sorry mess.

The EU won't get a single extra vaccine from it.

Az will waste time, energy and money defending it's fulfillment of a not for profit contract, which may impact on vaccine production elsewhere.

No manufacturer will ever make a not for profit vaccine again.

On the plus sides, it will be endlessly entertaining for the geeks of us who enjoy legal debate. And it might provide a smokescreen for some of the politicians involved, which is I suspect the main reason behind this.

How long do these things usually take?

I have no idea what the outcome will be but I doubt anyone will give us an at cost product next time

@Baileysforchristmas

I’ve taken AZ as a 51 year old female and I feel privileged and relieved to have had it, I can’t wait for my 2nd one, hopefully soon.

In comparison, I’m 30 years younger, at extremely little risk of Covid illness or death, and happy to wait until my preferred vaccine (Pfizer) is available. That said, I’ll have anything, even AZ, if that’s what my work requires in a few months’ time, and what allows me to get back into international travel which is where I make over half my annual income.

There’s a lot of negativity around AZ but there’s no doubt that we’re getting out of this dire mess due to fast mass vaccination made possible by their product. Here anyway

@poppycat10

That sort of comment proves the point made upthread and I know was made on the previous iterations of this thread that people need to increase the scope of their research/reading

I read a lot of German language media and social media.

Admittedly I don't read about France except through the English language media (or what I pick up from Tageschau and the like).

But it's certainly been the case that vaccination centres in Germany have been half full because people don't want AZ. That's probably way some states have said it doesn't matter how old you are, if you are happy to have AZ you can have it/make an appointment now.

I've seen plenty of people replying to someone I follow here who had AZ to say they were sorry for her and it was a pity that she didn't get the Biontech one. All based in Germany/tweeting in German.

And of course the Danes don't want it (at the moment at least).

Oh please do tell all of us European posters what we think.

I can't see why AZ would deliberately under produce - it wouldn't be in anyone's best interests. They might have over estimated what they could make in the timeframe but that doesn't mean they didn't do everything they could.
Taking legal action over a non profit vaccine is not a good look. If I was head of a pharmaceutical company, I'd be looking to set up new products (esp ones with a high degree of uncertainty re the manufacturing process) in countries that didn't sue me.
I don't know why the EU would think it had priority over any UK produced vaccine, particularly when the UK had financed the set up of supply chains here. If their lawyers advised them that they had this right, I'd not be inclined to trust any further advice those lawyers were giving me on my chance of successfully suing AZ.
Getting a 'no sue' clause overturned in a Belgian court will look dodgy as fuck.

The other thing is what happens if there's a new mutation and Oxford/AZ happens to be the company which first develops a vaccine - they aren't going to rush into a contract with the EU if they sued over the last contract.

There’s been a massive misunderstanding, miscommunication between AZ and the EU, I don’t think it’s just on numbers, I think they thought they had a legal right to the UK made vaccines, why I don’t know, were the EU mislead or assumed they had a right, I don’t know 🤷‍♀️

This pure speculation, but I wonder if the EU considers it has enough vaccine from other suppliers. Az undoubtedly has an image and an acceptance problem, although I appreciate this varies between countries. If the EU thinks it might have left-over unused vaccine, then might they be trying for an out of court settlement basically to get out of buying (paying for) outstanding doses?

@MrsHuntGeneNotJeremyObviously not just AZ, any pharmaceutical company, why would you sign a contract with the EU. Funny how they made sure they had extra vaccine order with Pfizer before they announced they would sue AZ

It’s the reverse really. AZ has just tried to sell an additional 100m doses to the EU, when they haven’t even delivered a third of the 300m. Not surprisingly this was declined.

The David and Goliath portrayal doesn’t work as well when Goliaths a pretty huge customer who provides a big chunk of the funding.

@Myalternate

It's interesting that the lawyer quoted references a lack of commerciality because that's also my impression based on the little we do know.

I'm a lawyer (although this is not my specialism!) and familiarity with a particular type of contract or industry can be invaluable when it comes to drafting documentation. You know the things that are likely to go wrong, you know how to deal with them/limit them or to warn the client about the , you're aware of "industry standard" terms, you know how companies within the industry operate and what is a reasonable expectation in terms of performance.

It will be interesting g to see how it plays out but I'm still not clear on the EU's end game unless it's simply to try and prove that it was all AZ's fault. If that is the aim it seems short sighted to me given the circumstances, the relationship will be destroyed regardless of who did the best drafting and that might prove costly.

Well, sort of. The original contract had an option in it for the EU to order that additional 100m doses, which had a deadline to it. The EU have declined to follow that up. It's not quite Az going to the EU and saying, "do you want to buy any more?"

It does rather add weight to the thought that the EU considers that it has quite enough Az on order already, thank you very much. As I understand it, they are currently committed to pay for all 300m, paying in stages as they are delivered. So might the desired outcome for the EU to be to effectively get a settlement which means they don't need to buy all 300m?

I say freely that this is 100% speculation. But, other than political arse-covering, I can't see what on earth else the EU might aim to get out of this. I get that they are pissed off and that they consider themselves let down, but I don't understand what the objective of their suit is.

Presumably all will come out in due course...

@BuggerBognor please let me know what you find 😊 very interested

Not sure this has been shared. Az's statement on the proposed legal action. www.astrazeneca.com/media-centre/statements/2021/statement-on-eu-legal-action.html#

[quote Motorina]Not sure this has been shared. Az's statement on the proposed legal action. www.astrazeneca.com/media-centre/statements/2021/statement-on-eu-legal-action.html#[/quote]
This is a good statement.

It makes me feel sad that with such good intentions this is the outcome for them.

@Baileysforchristmas

There’s been a massive misunderstanding, miscommunication between AZ and the EU, I don’t think it’s just on numbers, I think they thought they had a legal right to the UK made vaccines, why I don’t know, were the EU mislead or assumed they had a right, I don’t know 🤷‍♀️

Because the contract is with AZ, not individual manufacturers. AZ can meet that with vaccines from any of the 4 factories producing the vaccine, ordinarily. Except that while both the EU and UK contracts contain a best efforts clause, the U.K. one also contains a Britain first clause. So the U.K. factories are producing only for the U.K., meanwhile the EU factories are being used to supply the Eu and the rest of the world.

I’d imagine the legal case involves trying to figure out whether AZ met the best efforts clause and if they did breach it, whether giving preference to the U.K. was good enough reason.

@MarshaBradyo yes, indeed. I thought this particularly striking:

"AstraZeneca is currently the leading supplier to more than 100 countries through COVAX providing 97% of its supply to date. Each dose has been made with vaccine serum originating from outside the EU."

@RafaIsTheKingOfClay "Because the contract is with AZ, not individual manufacturers"

As a matter of legal accuracy, no. The UK contract is with AZ UK, the EU one with AZ AB, which is registered in Sweden. These are different legal entities, registered in different countries.

[quote Motorina]@MarshaBradyo yes, indeed. I thought this particularly striking:

"AstraZeneca is currently the leading supplier to more than 100 countries through COVAX providing 97% of its supply to date. Each dose has been made with vaccine serum originating from outside the EU."[/quote]
Isn’t that the Serum institute?

If it is the serum institute, then AZ issued them with a legal notice earlier this month.