This week, a ruling from the Supreme Court is likely to mean that the compensation paid to children in claims where their life expectancy has been shortened will be significantly higher.
The judgment has been awaited for a long time and, as lawyers who represent children injured as the result of medical negligence, we welcome the court’s decision.
What is the background to the case?
The case of CCC involves a child who sadly suffered a severe brain injury caused by hypoxia at birth in 2015. The Trust admitted that the child’s injuries had been caused by its negligence. Both parties agreed that, because of the negligence, the child’s life expectancy had been reduced to 29.
It was also agreed that if she had not been injured, she would have obtained GCSEs and would have gone into paid employment. Her loss of earnings to age 29 was agreed at £160,000.
There was also a claim for the child’s loss of earnings from age 29 to the average life expectancy (that she would have lived to, but for the Trust’s negligence). This period of time is known as ‘the lost years.’
The Trust disagreed with this claim.
What was the Court’s decision?
In 2023, the High Court was asked to consider the issue and decided that child claimants with a shortened life expectancy could not recover compensation for the loss of earnings they would have suffered after their expected life expectancy.
The High Court was following the decision of Croke v Wiseman, which ruled in 1982 that child claimants could not recover compensation for lost years, as they would not likely have dependents.
Following the High Court decision, the claimant in CCC was given permission to ‘leapfrog’ their appeal to the Supreme Court.
What did the Supreme Court decide?
The Supreme Court judgement was handed down on 18.02.26 allowing the appeal. The Court decided that:
- The purpose of compensation is to place the claimant, as far as money can, in the position they would have been in but for the negligence.
- The law does not require proof that the child would have had dependants or that their future life would have taken a specific course.
- Denying children lost years damages created an unjustifiable inconsistency between adults and children suffering life-shortening injuries.years damages created an shortening injuries.
- The Court confirmed that lost years claims are not limited by age.years claims are not limited by age
- Lost years compensation is designed to compensate a claimant for their own loss, not anyone else’s, and the claimant’s right to compensation does not depend on how they might choose to use them.
The decision in Croke was therefore found to be incorrect and was overruled. It was ruled that CCC could recover compensation for her lost years.
What will happen next in CCC?
The High Court will now be asked to decide whether lost years compensation should be paid to CCC on the facts of the case and, if so, how much. It is anticipated that the lost years claim for CCC could be worth £800,000.
No amount of money can ever undo negligence or give a child their life back that they should have had, but compensation allows them to put measures such as care packages in place to give them the quality of life they deserve.
Kirsty Dakin is a specialist medical negligence solicitor at MDS and says ‘This is a monumental decision in personal injury and clinical negligence law and has put right a decision that was unjust. Credit must be given to the courage and tenacity of CCC’s litigation friend for securing justice not only for CCC but for every current and future child claimant.’
.webp)
