Legal Videos
  • All Technology
  • AI
  • Autonomy
  • B2B Growth
  • Big Data
  • BioTech
  • ClimateTech
  • Consumer Tech
  • Crypto
  • Cybersecurity
  • DevOps
  • Digital Marketing
  • Ecommerce
  • EdTech
  • Enterprise
  • FinTech
  • GovTech
  • Hardware
  • HealthTech
  • HRTech
  • LegalTech
  • Nanotech
  • PropTech
  • Quantum
  • Robotics
  • SaaS
  • SpaceTech
AllNewsDealsSocialBlogsVideosPodcastsDigests

Legal Pulse

EMAIL DIGESTS

Daily

Every morning

Weekly

Sunday recap

NewsDealsSocialBlogsVideosPodcasts
LegalVideosCCC (by Her Mother and Litigation Friend MMM) v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust [2026] UKSC 5
Legal

CCC (by Her Mother and Litigation Friend MMM) v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust [2026] UKSC 5

•February 18, 2026
0
Supreme Court of the United Kingdom
Supreme Court of the United Kingdom•Feb 18, 2026

Original Description

CCC (by her mother and litigation friend MMM) (Appellant) v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (Respondent)
Case ID: UKSC/2023/0111
https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2023-0111.html
Judgment date: 18 February 2026
Neutral citation: [2026] UKSC 5
On appeal from [2023] EWHC 1770 (KB)
The claimant (and appellant), CCC, sustained a hypoxic brain injury during her birth. As a result, she has severe cerebral palsy and her life expectancy has been reduced to 29 years old. The defendant (and respondent) is the NHS Trust responsible for the management of the hospital where the claimant was born. It admits that it is responsible for the negligence which caused the claimant’s brain injury.
At trial, the parties agreed that, if the claimant had not been injured, she would have had a normal life expectancy. They also agreed that she would likely have gained GCSEs and other qualifications leading to paid employment, that she would have worked until the age of 68, and that she would have received a pension for the remainder of her life. The claimant’s loss of earnings to the age of 29 was agreed to be £160,000. This left the question of financial loss during her lost years.
The parties agreed that the trial judge was bound by the decision in Croke v Wiseman [1982] 1 WLR 71, in which the Court of Appeal held that lost years damages could not be recovered in cases where the claimant is a young child. The trial judge therefore granted the claimant a leap-frog certificate to appeal directly to the Supreme Court on this issue.
The issue is:
Can a young child claimant recover damages for financial loss caused by her inability to work during the years of expected life she has lost due to the defendant’s clinical negligence (“lost years damages”)?
By a majority of four to one, the Supreme Court allows the claimant's appeal.
More information is available on our website:
0

Comments

Want to join the conversation?

Loading comments...