Lost Years Claims For Children – Clinical Negligence Case Analysis
A recent decision by the Supreme Court has helped to clarify how lost years claims may apply to children. These types of claims are well established in cases involving adults but have historically been harder to apply in cases related to children. This is largely due to the challenges in assessing a child’s future earning potential.
However, this recent case and landmark Supreme Court decision have provided important clarification, confirming that lost years claims can be brought on behalf of children.
What is a lost years claim?
A lost years claim is a form of compensation that can be awarded when an individual’s life expectancy has been reduced as a result of clinical negligence. The compensation that may be awarded accounts for the loss of future earnings during the years that they would have otherwise lived and worked.
Lost years claims play a critical role in clinical negligence cases where the harm caused has a profound and lifelong impact. Compensation for lost years is designed to recognise the financial consequences of a shortened life expectancy and ensure that future losses are properly accounted for. These calculations are complex, but typically based on available evidence, including educational attainment and future earning capacity.
The recent Supreme Court decision
The complexities of lost years claims for children were recently brought to light by the case of CCC (by her mother and litigation friend MMM) (Appellant) v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (Respondent) [2026] UKSC 5.
In this case, the Supreme Court considered an appeal on behalf of a child (by her mother, who was acting as a litigation friend). The appeal was brought on the basis that there had been no principle in place for compensation to be awarded to a severely disabled child Claimant who had a reduced life expectancy as a consequence of the clinical negligence suffered, resulting in a financial loss for the “lost” years that the Claimant could have worked but for the negligence. This is the period between their likely early death and the retirement age they would have reached but for their injury.
Facts of the case
The Claimant sadly suffered a severe brain injury as a result of experiencing severe chronic partial hypoxia before and during her birth in 2015. As a result of the sustained injury, she now has severe cerebral palsy, and she has been completely dependent on others since birth. Unfortunately, the Claimant is not anticipated to improve, and her life expectancy has been reduced to just 29 years of age.
The Defendant (the NHS Trust) has accepted that they are responsible for the injury caused to the Claimant. At trial, it was subsequently agreed by the parties that had the Claimant not sustained her injury, there was a chance that she could have experienced a normal life expectancy. It was found that she could have obtained her GCSEs and higher qualifications from College or University, leading to paid employment. She was then likely to have worked up until the age of 68, receiving a pension upon retirement.
The Claimant’s loss of earnings up until the age of 29 were therefore agreed as being valued at the sum of £160,000.00. It was then to be determined whether the Claimant could pursue a claim for financial loss during the years that are expected to be lost beyond her life expectancy age of 29.
Whilst earlier case law demonstrated the ability of being able to claim compensation for lost years and the age of the Claimant had not been relevant when deciding this (Pickett v British Rail Engineering Ltd [1980] A.C. 136, [1978] 11 WLUK 16 and Gammell v Wilson [1982] A.C. 27, [1981] 2 WLUK 66), such awards were not deemed available to young children in the case of Croke v Wiseman [1982] 1 W.L.R. 71, [1981] 10 WLUK 164.
Decision of the appeal
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, and it was found that the decision in Croke v Wiseman had been incorrect. The Court had been unable to draw a distinction between lost years claims brought on behalf of a young Claimant and claims brought on behalf of older children or adults. Whilst it can be difficult to calculate such a head of claim, the Court will assess the compensation based on the evidence made available to them.
The case was therefore to be remitted to the trial judge for the assessment of compensation for lost years, the case of Croke v Wiseman being overruled and Pickett v British Rail Engineering Ltd and Gammell v Wilson being followed.
Why is this important for lost years claims?
This Supreme Court decision is incredibly significant for the future of lost years claims, as it confirms that this type of compensation is not restricted by the age of the Claimant. Children who suffer life-limiting injuries as a result of clinical negligence can pursue compensation for the earnings likely to be lost in adulthood.
Therefore, if you or a loved one has suffered an injury that has reduced life expectancy, you may be able to bring a lost years claim as part of a wider clinical negligence case. Your ability to do so will depend on whether negligence can be established, the extent to which life expectancy has been reduced, and evidence of future employment. In cases involving children, it is typically a litigation friend who will bring the claim on their behalf.
How we can help
Compensation claims for lost years can be complex, particularly when involving young claimants and uncertain career paths. However, the specialist clinical negligence solicitors at GA can help you to navigate these considerations properly.
Our experienced clinical negligence solicitors in Plymouth will be able to guide you through every stage of making a claim and will help to both determine whether a lost years claim is possible and build the evidence to support it.
To get advice from one of our expert surgical negligence solicitors in Plymouth, call 01752 203500 today, email enquiries@GAsolicitors.com, or fill in our online claim form, and a member of the team will be in touch.
GA Solicitors’ medical negligence team includes members of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL), as well as being ranked in Chambers UK and The Legal 500. You can be assured you are in the best possible hands.
All content on this website (inclusive of guides, blogs and imagery) is strictly copyrighted by Gill Akaster LLP, trading as GA Solicitors. It is not to be used by any third party without prior contact and permission. Any requests for content should be sent to katy.mckenna@GAsolicitors.com.