A boy from Northern Ireland who suffered catastrophic brain injuries at the hands of his father has lost a High Court battle over funding for a compensation case potentially worth millions of pounds.
The child's lawyers claimed a failure to fully cover the upfront costs of legal expertise and reports on loss of earnings and future care arrangements was unlawful.
But a judge rejected allegations of discrimination and a breach of his human rights.
Mr Justice Scoffield said: “I do not consider it to be inherently unfair that a claimant, even in a complex case, has no automatic right of payment of any legal costs.”
Now aged 14 and referred to as TA, the boy at the centre of the case cannot be identified.
When he was a baby he sustained life-threatening injuries, including a bleed to the brain and four fractured ribs.
His father was subsequently convicted of child cruelty in connection with the assault.
An application for a payout under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme led to an initial offer of £178,000 made in 2017.
The boy’s mother was not satisfied with the level of the award, based on the need to provide 24-hour care for the rest of his life.
In the first challenge of its kind, the court heard that the case raises systemic issues for compensation arrangements in Northern Ireland.
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 were brought against Compensation Services NI (CSNI) and the Department of Justice for allegedly failing to provide funding for those assessments.
Lawyers for the boy contended that all damages paid under the Scheme are needed for the child's care.
His mother claimed it was unfair that the payout could potentially be depleted by footing the bill for complex expert reports and legal expenses.
Mr Justice Scoffield was told that without the proper advice the true value of compensation potentially worth millions of pounds may never be known.
Counsel for the Department countered that it was a flawed challenge to a revised scheme which involved no breach of human rights.
He insisted that TA has rights to a review in circumstances where the door has not been closed to acquiring further reports if shown to be necessary.
Dismissing the legal challenge, Mr Justice Scoffield added that he hoped a review of the compensation claim by CSNI will now “proceed expeditiously”.
Reacting to the ruling, the boy’s solicitor, Ciaran O'Hare of McIvor Farrell, said: “The court recognises in its judgment that the approach of Compensation Services has not been exemplary.
“The court agreed with my client’s case that further expert evidence is required and I will continue to work towards achieving the best possible outcome.”