Claims involving a child

Claims on behalf of children

CPR 21 sets out the rules relating to proceedings involving children. A child is any person under the age of 18 (CPR 21.1(2)(b)).

There are specific procedural considerations including the appointment of a litigation friend (CPR 21.2) and the court’s approval of any settlement or payment (including any voluntary interim payment) (CPR 21.10). The rules state that unless a court has made a specific order that a child can act on their own behalf, a child cannot be involved in proceedings without the appointment of a litigation friend (CPR 21.2(2)). This rule applies equally to whether the child is the claimant or a defendant.

Special service provisions apply under CPR 6 for service of proceedings (or other notices) on children.

There are also certain types of claim which often involve children such as playground and sporting accidents.

For further guidance, see Practice Notes: Claims on behalf of children—an introduction and Service of the claim form—service on the defendant or their solicitor.

Appointment of a litigation friend

A person wishing to act

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest PI & Clinical Negligence News

PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—3 April 2025

This week's edition of PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights brings you an interesting case analysis addressing clinical negligence liability issues in private hospital settings. We include a road traffic accident case on credit hire claims and another discussing highway authority duties. We also look at a contributory negligence case in a construction site accident. In addition, we have our usual roundup of other news, cases and New Law Journal articles of interest.

Claims groups slam government report on personal injury reform

Law360, London: The government's plan to reduce premiums for motorists through its controversial reforms to claims for 'whiplash' injuries in 2020 have failed, consumer advocates said, after an official report found prices had fallen by less than promised.

Shooting from the hip—Legal crossfire over severe brain damage during private hip operation (Bartolomucci v Circle Health Group)

PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: The claimant sustained severe brain damage during a hip operation carried out by independent consultants at a private hospital and sued the private hospital for breach of contract in respect of the consultant’s alleged negligence. The court held that, on proper analysis of the terms of the contract, the scope of the contract between the private hospital and the claimant did not encompass the private hospital providing the consultants’ services; these were provided by the consultants directly to the patient and so the private hospital was not liable for breach of contract for any failure in the standard of care provided by the consultants. This is a rare and important decision about where liability may lie when something goes wrong resulting in injury in a private hospital in England and Wales. The claimant is seeking permission to appeal from the Court of Appeal. Written by Alexander Hutton KC, barrister at Hailsham Chambers.

When will a report be covered by without prejudice privilege? (BNP Paribas v Briggs & Forrester)

Construction analysis: The Technology and Construction Court (TCC), in an interlocutory matter, held that survey reports, commissioned unilaterally by one party to assist in settlement negotiations, were not subject to without prejudice privilege and should have been disclosed in the court proceedings, and could therefore be relied upon at trial.

View PI & Clinical Negligence by content type :

News