English 
Norsk 
Polski 
Lietuvių kalba 
On 18 June 2025, the Supreme Court ruled in a patient injury case concerning vaccination.
In 2015, there was an outbreak of mumps in Trondheim municipality. A female manager in the municipality was recommended by the municipal doctor to take a refresher dose of MMR and DTP vaccine. The municipal doctor's advice was based on recommendations from the Norwegian Institute of Public Health. Following the vaccination, the woman developed severe headaches and was eventually diagnosed with multiple sclerosis (MS). She was later granted disability benefit.
The woman reported the case to the Norwegian System of Patient Injury Compensation («NPE»), but the claim was rejected as NPE was of the opinion that the requirement for a causal link between the vaccination and the disease had not been met. She appealed to the Patient Injury Board, which upheld the rejection. The woman then took legal action, and both the District Court and the Court of Appeal concluded that there was a causal link. However, the majority of the Supreme Court came to the opposite conclusion and acquitted the state.
The rules on causality are regulated in Section 2 of the Patient Injury Act, which states that causality exists when the injury is «due to» the vaccination, and a preponderance of probability is required. However, section 3(2) of the Patient Injury Act stipulates that there is a lower standard of proof for causal relationship for injuries related to «recommended or mandatory vaccinations».
The key question in the case was therefore whether a refresher dose of the MMR vaccine should be considered recommended under the Infection Control Act, cf. section 3(2) of the Patient Injury Act, and that a lower standard of proof could therefore be applied.
The majority of the Supreme Court concluded that in such cases, the Infection Control Act only covers vaccinations given in accordance with the national vaccination programme. Vaccinations recommended by municipal authorities are not covered by the rule of a lower standard of proof, even if the recommendation is made in consultation with the Norwegian Institute of Public Health and is based on FHI's vaccination guide.
Contact person
Thomas Chr. Wangen
Contact us
