An import point is being made here. Our laws on civil liability are not designed to enrich defendants. They are, above all, a means to ensure responsible behaviour by holding people responsible for their actions even if there is no criminal intent.
It is not acceptable that someone can injure another person through negligence, even gross negligence, and simply walk away from the consequences.
Oh, but wait! That is exactly what insurance does. All those compo claims are met by insurance companies and the defendant (e.g. the car driver, the pharmaceutical company) is absolved and freed from the consequences.
And here’s a twist, when insurance is compulsory (e.g. motor, public liability) and there is no real competition among insurers, there is no incentive to reduce the amount of compensation paid out because the premiums will always cover the loss. In fact, there is a perverse incentive because higher claims justify higher premiums.
So, it is reasonable that pharmaceutical firms don’t want to sucked into the plaintiffs’ playground where vast sums are paid out without regard to the public interest e.g. in playgrounds or in vaccines.