Compensation case over boy who suffered brain injuries at hands of his father

The child’s lawyers claim an unlawful failure to cover the up-front costs of expert medical and legal reports required to determine the level of payout.

Ronan Lavery QC argued it was unfair to prevent proper access to justice and deplete damages to someone with severe disabilities.

He said: “It’s a form of direct and indirect discrimination.

“It puts people with serious injuries at a disadvantage because they don’t know the details of what they are entitled to under the (compensation) scheme.”

Now aged 12 and referred to as TA, the boy at the centre of the legal action cannot be identified.

When he was a baby he sustained life-threatening injuries, including a bleed to the brain and four fractured left ribs.

His father was subsequently convicted of child cruelty, according to lawyers.

With an application for a payout made under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme, a previous court heard that an award of £178,000 was made in 2017 on an interim basis.

TA’s representatives believe he is entitled to more, and argued that further expert reports are required to properly set out his case.

Judicial review proceedings have been brought against the Compensation Services and the Department of Justice for allegedly failing to provide funding for those assessments.

Lawyers for TA contend that all damages paid under the Scheme are needed for the child’s care.

His mother believes it is unfair that the payout could be depleted by the costs of complex expert reports and legal expenses.

She does not believe that the compensation process in her son’s type of case is fit for purpose.

Mr Lavery contended: “This is also a socio-economic matter, it’s personal and the court should apply greater scrutiny that is required.”

As the hearing continued, TA’s solicitor described the challenge as the first of its kind, raising significant systemic issues.

Ciaran O’Hare, of McIvor Farrell law firm, said outside court: “The outcome of this case may have ramifications with regards to the whole of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Services Scheme.”