£3.75 Million In Damages Secured For Child Struck By London Bus

In a recently concluded case, I had the opportunity to advise and represent a seven-year-old boy, K, who suffered a severe brain injury after being struck by a bus in South London. K was one of five siblings in a family already facing economic hardships, living in a three-bedroom council flat and, at times, depending on food banks.  A claim for damages was brought against the driver and the bus company.

Proceedings and rehabilitation

The defendants admitted liability for negligence at the outset of the claim.  Existing law allowed admissions to be withdrawn under specific circumstances; however, to eliminate this possibility, proceedings were commenced in the High Court earlier than usual, and judgment was entered against both Defendants.

The Defendants agreed to make interim payments so K could access rehabilitation. An extensive care plan, developed with the assistance of healthcare professionals, enabled K to enjoy his childhood as much as possible. As K grew older, he yearned for the independence of being a teenager but, in contrast to his peers, encountered developmental difficulties.  His behaviour became increasingly disruptive both at home and at school, often leading to self-destructive actions through petty crime and recidivism.  It was widely recognised within the rehabilitation team that K’s brain injury impaired his ability to regulate his impulses and manage his anger.

At the age of 18, K and his partner welcomed a child but their relationship was volatile, often needing police intervention.

The importance of expert evidence

To ensure K received the compensation award he needed to facilitate lifelong care and financial support, I commissioned a total of 26 reports from experts in medical, employment, and care-related assessment disciplines. The evidence noted fractures around the eyes and head, a subdural haemorrhage and illustrated the classical symptoms of a traumatic brain injury, including impaired memory, challenges in auditory learning, difficulties with executive functions, poor impulse control, and diminished emotional processing.

Expert reports commissioned on behalf of the Defendants attempted to portray K’s injuries as less severe.  However, even they could not dispute K’s need for ongoing support and someone to manage his finances nor could they deny that K was going to struggle to find or sustain employment.

As time passed, K began to distance himself from his rehabilitation team.  The brain injury caused a lack of insight, and K could not appreciate how failing to engage with the very team that supported him daily would (and did) drastically affect his well-being.  I recognised it was time for both parties to obtain conclusive expert evidence to assess K’s lifelong needs which in turn would assist in valuing the claim and steering towards a compromise.  Each side then took steps to commission the final round of expert reports in all key disciplines.

The settlement

On 30 January 2025, a roundtable meeting was held in London with the Defendants.  Leading Counsel William Waldrone KC and Counsel Pankaj Madan from Exchange Chambers represented K.  After thorough discussions, we convinced the Defendants to compromise the action for £3.75 million in damages.  This settlement accounted for future expenses related to a support worker, case manager, and a court-appointed Deputy to manage K’s financial affairs, along with compensation for lost earnings and other damages.

The outcome of this case was incredibly rewarding because, based on my 13 years of understanding the case, K’s behavioural patterns and his consistent disengagement, I was convinced that the value of the case would have fallen if it proceeded to trial.

I had the privilege of working with K and his deeply committed parents throughout the case, and I left feeling confident that K, along with his loved ones, including his child, will have the necessary funds for ongoing rehabilitation, care, and living expenses for the rest of his life.

Author