NHS negligence ruling increases childbirth claim payouts

Published: 19 February 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online.

A landmark NHS negligence ruling has reshaped how childbirth injury claims are assessed across England. The decision, handed down by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom on Wednesday, means children who suffer catastrophic injuries at birth can now claim compensation for future earnings they will never receive. Lawyers say the judgment corrects a decades-old injustice that treated injured children differently from adults in negligence cases.

The ruling centres on what are known as “lost years” damages. Until now, children whose lives were significantly shortened due to medical negligence were unable to recover compensation for income they would have earned in adulthood. The court’s majority decision overturns more than forty years of legal precedent and is expected to increase the overall cost of settling serious birth injury claims within the NHS.

The case was brought on behalf of a girl identified only as CCC. She suffered severe brain damage in Sheffield in 2015 after being deprived of oxygen during labour. Medical errors by the midwife overseeing her mother’s delivery were found to have caused catastrophic harm. CCC now lives with cerebral palsy and requires constant care. She cannot walk, talk, or eat independently, and her life expectancy is significantly reduced.

In 2015, the High Court of Justice awarded her family a £6.8 million lump sum. It also ordered annual payments of £350,000 to fund round-the-clock care from two carers. However, the court ruled that she could not pursue compensation for the earnings she would never have the chance to make. Her legal team challenged that conclusion, arguing it placed injured children at a clear disadvantage compared with adults.

The family used a rare “leapfrog appeal” to take the matter directly to the Supreme Court. In a four-to-one majority decision, five justices ruled in favour of CCC. They concluded that denying lost years damages to injured children was inconsistent with broader negligence principles. The court stated that compensation law should reflect the financial loss suffered, regardless of whether the claimant had begun a working life.

James Drysdale, the solicitor representing CCC, described the outcome as historic. He said the NHS negligence ruling restores fairness and ensures injured children are no longer treated as second-class claimants. According to Drysdale, it is unconscionable that children were previously barred from seeking damages for income they would have earned in adulthood.

The judgment overturns the long-standing precedent set in the 1981 case of Croke v Wiseman. In that case, the court determined that children could not claim for lost years because they had not yet entered employment. The Supreme Court found that reasoning outdated and inconsistent with later case law involving adult claimants whose life expectancy was shortened by negligence.

As a result of the new decision, the High Court will now reconsider CCC’s claim for an additional £800,000. This sum reflects projected earnings and pension income from age 29, her estimated lifespan, to 85, the average life expectancy for a woman in the United Kingdom. The figure is calculated using national average earnings data and pension projections, rather than assumptions about a specific career path.

Legal experts believe the financial implications for the NHS could be significant. The health service in England already faces clinical negligence liabilities estimated at around £60 billion. A substantial proportion of these claims arise from maternity care incidents. Errors during childbirth often result in life-long disabilities, leading to high compensation payments to cover specialist care, accommodation, and equipment.

The NHS negligence ruling is therefore likely to add to an already heavy financial burden. Lawyers say future settlements in severe birth injury cases will now routinely include compensation for lost earnings. For children with shortened life expectancy, those sums could amount to hundreds of thousands of pounds per case.

However, patient safety advocates argue that the real issue lies not in compensation costs but in preventing harm. Paul Whiteing, chief executive of Action Against Medical Accidents, welcomed the judgment while acknowledging its financial impact. He said that while the decision may increase negligence payouts, the most effective way to reduce costs is to improve patient safety standards.

Whiteing echoed recent concerns raised by Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee. The committee has repeatedly warned that rising negligence liabilities pose long-term risks to NHS finances. It has also stressed that systemic improvements in maternity care are essential to reducing avoidable injuries. According to campaigners, investment in staffing, training, and oversight would ultimately save money by preventing tragic errors.

Specialist birth injury solicitors have also described the NHS negligence ruling as monumental. Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, said the decision recognises the profound injustice faced by injured children. She noted that many families already struggle with emotional and financial pressures after catastrophic birth injuries.

For families like CCC’s, the ruling carries both practical and symbolic importance. The additional compensation sought in her case would not change her medical prognosis. However, it would provide greater financial security for her care and acknowledge the working life she has been denied. Supporters argue that compensation must reflect not only care needs but also lost opportunities.

The NHS has not yet issued a detailed public response to the judgment. However, health service leaders are acutely aware of mounting negligence costs. In recent years, maternity services have faced intense scrutiny following a series of high-profile reviews into care failings across several trusts. These investigations have revealed patterns of understaffing, poor communication, and missed warning signs during labour.

Campaigners say the NHS negligence ruling should serve as a further wake-up call. They argue that litigation costs represent the visible consequence of deeper systemic problems. Each successful claim reflects a patient who has suffered avoidable harm. While compensation offers financial redress, it cannot undo lifelong disability.

Legal commentators suggest that the decision may prompt renewed debate over how clinical negligence is funded. Some policymakers have proposed reforms to limit rising liabilities. Others maintain that access to full compensation remains essential for justice and accountability. The Supreme Court’s ruling appears firmly aligned with the latter principle.

The judgment emphasises that negligence law must apply consistently. Adults with shortened life expectancy have long been able to claim for lost years. Denying children that same right created an unequal system. By correcting this imbalance, the court has reinforced the principle that compensation should reflect the full extent of financial loss.

In practical terms, calculating lost years damages for children will involve careful assumptions. Courts will rely on statistical averages rather than speculative career projections. This approach aims to balance fairness with realism. Judges must ensure awards are reasonable while acknowledging the economic value of a working life.

For families navigating complex litigation, clarity in the law is crucial. The NHS negligence ruling removes a longstanding barrier and offers a clearer path to comprehensive compensation. Lawyers expect that similar cases currently in the system may now be reassessed in light of the judgment.

Ultimately, the case highlights the human dimension behind legal principles. CCC’s life has been irrevocably altered by mistakes made during her birth. The Supreme Court’s decision cannot change that reality. Yet it affirms that the law must recognise every aspect of loss caused by negligence.

As the NHS confronts rising financial pressures, the ruling underscores a difficult balance. Ensuring justice for injured patients carries a cost. Preventing harm in the first place would spare both families and the health service from future hardship. The NHS negligence ruling therefore marks not only a legal milestone but also a renewed call for safer maternity care across England.

Check our latest news