header-logo header-logo

04 February 2026
Issue: 8148 / Categories: Legal News , Clinical negligence , National Health Service , Health & safety
printer mail-detail

High cost of clinical negligence outlined

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has urged the government to move towards a less adversarial system of clinical negligence, after the total cost to the NHS quadrupled within 20 years to an eye-watering £60bn

The PAC report, ‘Costs of clinical negligence’, published last week, highlighted ‘disproportionate legal costs’ with claimant legal fees more than tripling to £538m in 2024-25. Lower value claims with damages of £25,000 or less cost 3.7 times more in legal fees than victims received in damages.

In terms of types of case, brain injury suffered during maternity care represented 2% of all claims by volume but the damages accounted for 68% of total costs.

One factor behind the increasing costs is that claims are settled based on how much care would cost in the private sector rather than the NHS, which stems from a 1948 law. The PAC said this means the taxpayer may pay twice for clinical negligence—once for compensation and again if the victims uses the NHS for their care.

The PAC called on the government to produce within two months a national framework for improving patient safety with annual targets, and a national system for sharing data between NHS trusts. It called, in particular, for a government plan to improve maternity care and reduce the cost of claims in this area.

Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, PAC chair, said a less adversarial system would reduce costs and ensure claims are paid more quickly.

Dr Pallavi Bradshaw, medical director at Medical Protection Society, which assists healthcare professionals, said: ‘The government simply cannot afford to do nothing. A comprehensive strategy—which balances fair compensation for patients and affordability for the NHS—is urgently needed. This strategy must iron out the many inequities and flaws in the system—not least disproportionate legal fees in lower-value claims.’

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll