The plaintiff’s son developed ocular and facial edema soon after receiving H1N1 invaccination on Nov. 23th in 2009, however no definite diagnosis was made after investigations in several hospitals. The patient then developed left hemiparaplegia and blurred vision, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis was diagnosed by brain biopsy in Taipei Veteran Hospital. And he died on Aug. 20th in 2012. The plaintiff claimed for vaccine injury relief against Ministry of Health and Welfare, yet was the claim was rejected on the basis of no causation by review subcommittee on the Relief of Immunization Hazards on Oct. 30th in 2012. The plaintiff then filed this administrative action.

This article briefs the decisions of high and supreme courts and criticizes the reasoning, and holds that “impartiality” should be the essential requirement in the composition of review subcommittee on the relief of immunization hazards, every member should be impartial regardless experts in the fields of medical and health, anatomy and pathology, law, or members of the community. And we should adapt special administrative relief strategy in response to new vaccines, with special reference to the burden of proof on causation, which should be reversed onto the alleged party because proving the unknown pathogenic mechanism of the new vaccines would certainly fall far beyond the ability of vaccine victims.