[2008] EWHC 2234 (QB)

Defendant admitted liability for Claimant’s brain injury arising following excessive infusion of dextrose when six days old. Claimant suffered severe and permanent brain damage and was unlikely to develop any meaningful communication skills. Whilst Claimant had no insight into her condition she had a significant life expectancy and an award of £210,000 was ordered for general damages.

In respect of past care, the Court was not satisfied it was ever the Claimant’s mother’s intention to return to work following the Claimant’s birth as she wished to have further children. In the circumstances they concluded the appropriate rate for this provision should be based on commercial rates subject to a 25% reduction following Evans v Pontypridd Roofing Ltd (2001).

Claimant’s mother wanted to continue to provide home care for the Claimant in the future rather than specialist provision in a group facility for autistic patients. The Court concluded calculation of future losses on the basis of continuing home provision was appropriate given the Claimant’s mother wanted this and felt it was in the Claimant’s best interests.