Pharmaceutical Company and Ethical Principles - Assignment Example

Assignment Name Date Course QUESTION 1 Issue The issue is whether the directors of the pharmaceutical company breached the ethical principles. The directors of the company decided not to reveal to the public the side effects of the drug to be used for the treatment of rheumatism. The directors intended to keep the investors happy and ensure that it makes profits from the new drug. Revealing the information about the side effects of the drugs would have impacted negatively on the profitability of the company. Rule According to the ethical principles, a pharmaceutical company has an obligation to the members of the public. High levels of trust should be upheld at all times by the pharmaceutical companies. The pharmaceutical companies have to maintain public trust by developing high quality drugs. In order to maintain public trust, a pharmaceutical company is required to provide detailed information about its products1. Detailed information about the side effects or allergies caused by the drug should be clearly highlighted. This is for the purposes of warning the consumers about the effects of the drugs. This includes all the side effects that the patients may end up experiencing as a result of using the drug. The ethical principles require that the pharmaceutical companies should maintain professionalism at all times during the development as well as manufacturing of the drug. According to the ethical principles the pharmaceutical companies should be committed to the safety of the members of the public. All the pharmaceutical products should be safe for consumption and should not expose the patients to any danger. Application The directors of the company are in breach of the principles of maintaining the safety of the members of the public. The drug may have impact negatively on the health of some of the patients by failing to provide the information about the side effects of the drug. The directors of the company failed to provide detailed information about the drug including its side effects. The directors of the company are in breach of public trust by failing to provide detailed information about the side effects of the drug. This is despite the company being fully aware of the side effects. It is a breach of ethics for the company to choose profitability over public safety and trust. The company had maintained professionalism when it hired scientists to carry out further investigation on the drug. However, the company was in breach of ethics when it failed to utilize the information obtained by the scientists which indicated that the drug has side effects. The members of the public may therefore be harmed as a result of using the drug which may affect their health. The issue of harmful drugs was highlighted in the case of Rumenos v The State of Western Australia2. Conclusion In conclusion, the directors of the company are in breach of the ethical principles. The failure of the company to disclose the information about the side effects of the new drug was in breach of public trust, safety and professionalism. It was unethical for the directors of the company to choose profitability over the informing the members of the public about the side effects of the new drug. This is considering that it may cause harm to the members of the public. QUESTION 2 Issue The issue is whether Quentin’s father was in breach of unofficial contract that he made through a promise to pay for his son’s university fees for the year. Quentin accepted the offer made by his father and he had to give up a tennis scholarship which he had been offered as a result of being a talented tennis player. His father refused to honour the promise after Quentin decided to take a break from the studies and travel oversees. This is despite honouring his part of the agreement. Rule A contract is comprised of an agreement between two parties with each party having a clear obligation to wards the other party. A promise made between two parties is therefore considered unofficial contract3. A contract can be made verbally and it does not necessarily require written agreements. A party is in breach of the promise in case they do not fulfill their part of the promise. According to the principles of justice, the actions of both parties should be fair and satisfactory to all. Unfairness is an indication of injustice. The principle of faithfulness requires the people to stick to their promises and ensure that they have fully met their obligations. The breach of faithfulness by a party to the contract contributed to the breach of contract. All the parties are required to meet their obligations of the contact whether it is written or not. Action may be taken against a party that is in breach of a promise or contract. The actions of all parties to the promise must be in good faith. Any action that is not in good faith may contribute to the breach of promise. Application The agreement between Quentin and his father can be considered as unofficial contract. Each party had an obligation to the unofficial contract. Quentin’s father promised to pay fees for his son if he worked at his restaurant every Sunday. Quentin had to give up his scholarship in order to fulfill his obligations. He fulfilled his obligations as agreed but he also made a decision to take a break from his studies in order to travel overseas. This can be considered as new term that had not initially been discussed. However the agreement only required him to work for a year. The refusal of his father to pay the fees as agreed is a breach of promise and agreement. The actions of his father was not in good faith as Quentin had fulfilled his part and had even given up the tennis scholarship. In the case of Alcatel Australia Ltd v Scarcella, the issue of good faith in a contract was highlighted4. The refusal of Quentin’s father to pay the fees is unjust and unfair. It can also be considered as a breach of contract since he failed to fulfill his obligations. The principle of justice has been breached by the Quentin’s father due to his refusal to pay the university fees. Conclusion Quentin’s father is in breach of the promise that he made to his son. This is as a result of failing to meet his obligations after his son had already met his part by working at the restaurant for one year. The principle of justice, fairness and good faith has also been breached by Quentin’s father. The decision made by Quentin was not part of the agreements and he did not breach the agreement or contract. QUESTION 3 Issue The issue is whether Samantha breached the contract through a deceptive and misleading conduct for the purposes of ensuring that Terrence buys the Holden Monaro vehicle. This is after she assured Terrence that the car did not have rusted suspension. Terrence could not have made the purchase if he was aware that it had rusted suspension which is not visible to the eye. Rule A breach of contract is breached when one party use undue influence or provides false information for their own benefits. Providing false and dishonest information in order to gain advantage over the other party is not allowed5. The provision of verbal information during the process of making a contract is considered valid. This is because the verbal information that is provided during the contract contributes to the decision making process by the other party. False information provided during the contract leads to undue influence as well as coercion. A contract where false information has been used by one party to gain undue advantage can be considered null and void. Dishonesty during a contract only acts in the best interest of one party. This can also be a reason for a contract to be declared null and void. The party that uses undue influence as well as false information can be held accountable for the reach of contract. This means that the party can be forced to repay for the damages caused after the contract has been considered null and void. Application Samantha informed Terrence that the vehicle did not have rusted suspension. As the owner of the vehicle, she should have had information about the issue considering that it is common for that type of vehicle to have rusted suspension. Since the problem could not be seen through the use of visible eyes, Terrence could not have verified and had to rely in the information provided by Terrence. The information was however false as the problem was noticed a week later. This is an indication that Samantha used dishonest means to ensure that Terrence purchases the vehicle. The use false information amounts to s deceptive conduct on the part of Samantha. Since Terrence was influenced by the information provided by Samantha, the actions of Samantha amounts to unwarranted influence. The issue of undue influence was highlighted in the case of Garcia v National Australia Bank Limited6. The use of false information influenced the decision making process of Terrence leading to the purchase of the vehicle. Conclusion The actions of Samantha amount to a misleading and deceptive conduct through the provision of false information. Samantha also used undue influence which led to the purchase of the vehicle by Terrence. As a result of the undue influence as well as misleading and deceptive conduct, the contract can be declared null and void. Samantha may be required to refund Terrence his money and pay for any damages or losses incurred by Terrence As a result of the contract. List of References Alcatel Australia Ltd v Scarcella [1998] 44 NSWLR 349 Garcia v National Australia Bank Limited [1986] HCA 48 Rumenos v The State of Western Australia [2011] WASCA 59 McKendric, E, 2014, Contract Law: Text, cases and materials, Oxford University Press. World Medical Association, 2013, World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving the human subjects, Jama 310(20), 2191. Read More