Infected Blood Inquiry

I recommend that the scheme should offer redress to those infected with HCV and/or HIV, and/or HBV (limited to chronic HBV unless the infection has resulted in a fatality in the acute period), and to defined categories of persons indirectly affected by such infections.

In May 2025, the UK Government stated that both infected and affected individuals are eligible for compensation, covering direct or indirect infections of HIV, Hepatitis C, and chronic or fatal acute Hepatitis B, as well as partners, parents, children, siblings, and carers subject to certain criteria (Cabinet Office response, May 2025). The record holds no update since the UK Government's response of May 2025 (Cabinet Office response, May 2025).

I recommend that the conditions of eligibility for admission of relevant infected persons to the scheme should be that: a) they have been diagnosed as being infected with one or more of HCV (including natural clearers who have suffered loss), HIV, or HBV (limited to chronic cases of HBV unless the infection has resulted in a fatality in the acute period); b) they received a transfusion of blood or components of blood, blood products or transfer of tissue capable of transmitting one or more of the relevant diseases; and c) their infection was not unlikely to have been caused by administration of the relevant treatment, regard being had as to the available evidence as to the measures in place at the time to reduce the possibility of infection, including but not limited to the date of relevant effective screening tests or effective viral inactivation treatments; or d)(i) it was not unlikely to have been caused by transmission to them by a person who fulfils conditions (a) to (c) above, or (ii) by transmission to them by a person who fulfils condition (d)(i), such as a child or children infected by their mother who had previously been infected by her partner, who in turn had been infected as in (a)-(c).

In May 2025, the UK Government confirmed that it accepts the recommendation and is compensating individuals directly or indirectly infected through NHS blood, blood products, or tissue (Cabinet Office response, May 2025). It stated in May 2025 that eligible recipients include living or deceased individuals with HIV, Hepatitis C, or chronic Hepatitis B, those indirectly infected through loved ones, and people who died from acute Hepatitis B (Cabinet Office response, May 2025). The record holds no update since the UK Government's response of May 2025 (Cabinet Office response, May 2025).

As above, save that (a) the last bullet point should read: "eligibility is accepted if the information available points towards eligibility and the opposite cannot be shown to be more likely" and (b) eligibility should be automatic for individuals already accepted under an existing support scheme.

The UK Government stated in May 2025 that people registered on current or predecessor support schemes will be automatically eligible for compensation, although they may need to provide further evidence to assess award amounts (Cabinet Office response, May 2025). It added that unregistered applicants must provide evidence of infection and causative treatment to establish eligibility while avoiding an adversarial burden of proof (Cabinet Office response, May 2025). The record holds no update since the UK Government's response of May 2025 (Cabinet Office response, May 2025).

I recommend that the following relevant affected persons should be admitted to the scheme: a) spouses, civil partners and long term cohabitees (for at least one year in the case of the latter) of living or deceased eligible infected persons; b) children of an eligible living or deceased infected person; c) parents of an eligible living or deceased infected person; d) siblings of an eligible living or deceased infected person; e) providers of care to an eligible living or deceased infected person, as a result of the infection; and f) members of the family, or friends of an eligible living or deceased infected person, whose relationship with them was so close that it could reasonably be expected that their mental or physical health would be seriously affected by the consequences of the disease, and who have suffered emotionally, mentally and/or physically as a result.

The UK Government stated in December 2024 that affected persons will be eligible under the scheme where their case is linked to that of an eligible infected person, encompassing affected partners, children, parents, siblings, and carers who cared for loved ones with an infection without reward or remuneration (Cabinet Office response, Dec 2024). The record holds no update since the UK Government's response of December 2024 (Cabinet Office response, Dec 2024).

I recommend that infections eligible for compensation should be classified in the following manner: a) there should be defined categories for each type of eligible infection, and the stages through which it progresses, and for each category defined degrees of severity to which a range of possible awards for the impact of the disease can be applied; b) the stages and degrees of severity for each disease should be defined by an independent clinical expert advisory panel, by reference to clinical professional consensus; c) the range of potential awards for the impact should be determined by an independent advisory panel of legal experts, taking account of but not limited by current practice in courts and tribunals across the UK.

In May 2025, the UK Government stated that compensation will be available for all recommended categories of award based on infection severity or familial relationship, with award ranges developed by an expert group under Professor Sir Jonathan Montgomery bringing together clinical, legal, and social care expertise (Cabinet Office response, May 2025). The record holds no update since the UK Government's response of May 2025 (Cabinet Office response, May 2025).

I recommend that the appropriate award in any case should be composed under the following categories of loss, applicable to both eligible infected and affected persons: a) an Injury Impact Award for past and future physical and mental injury, emotional distress and injury to feelings caused by the infection and treatments for it, or (whilst not being personally infected) being affected by them or by the death of an eligible infected person (including, as part of this, an award for loss of society of the deceased); b) a Social Impact Award for past and future social consequences of the infection including stigma and social isolation; c) an Autonomy Award as additional redress for the distress and suffering caused by the impact of the disease, including interference with family and private life, including where relevant: personal autonomy, loss of marriage/partnership prospects, loss of chance to have children. It should include sums for the aggravated distress caused by interferences in their autonomy and private life such as lack of informed consent, lack of sufficient information about the risks of treatment, and about diagnosis, treatment and testing, or being the subject of research without their informed consent. It should include the effects of lack of candour and inadequate responses by authority. d) a Care Award for the future care needs of the eligible infected person, and to compensate for past losses in respect of care necessitated by their infection (to be paid directly to the infected person where they have paid for care, and/or directly to an affected person who has provided care); and e) a Financial Loss Award for past and future financial losses suffered as a result of the infection.

The Inquiry recommended structuring compensation awards across five specific categories of loss. In December 2024, the UK Government stated that it had accepted the recommended categories and designed the scheme to include injury impact, social impact, autonomy, care, and financial loss awards (Cabinet Office response, Dec 2024). It noted a slight deviation, routing the care award through the infected person or their estate to distribute for speed and simplicity (Cabinet Office response, Dec 2024). In April 2026, the National Audit Office found that the scheme uses a tariff payment system awarding set amounts across the five categories (Gareth Davies, Apr 2026).

I recommend that there should be no award for exemplary damages, though it should remain open to a claimant to pursue such a claim in the courts irrespective of whether they make a claim on the scheme.

In the Government response to the Infected Blood Inquiry in December 2024, the UK Government accepted the recommendation on exemplary damages and stated: "There is no award for exemplary damages, as recommended by the Second Interim Report in recommendation 7" (Cabinet Office response, Dec 2024). The record holds no update since the UK Government's response of December 2024 (Cabinet Office response, Dec 2024).

I recommend that the Government should approve a scheme setting out a framework of tariff based compensation for eligible infected and affected persons, at rates which broadly take account of but are not limited by current practice in courts and tribunals across the UK and sums payable in other UK compensation schemes, and allowing an assessed basis for defined financial losses. The rates of compensation should be based on the advice of the independent clinical and legal panels and set by the scheme.

The Inquiry recommended that the Government approve a tariff-based compensation framework. The UK Government stated in May 2025 that the scheme would use a tariff-based framework with set criteria and rates to calculate payments, but it did not mention clinical and legal panel advice or assessed financial losses (Cabinet Office response, May 2025). The National Audit Office found in April 2026 that the scheme uses a tariff payment system awarding set amounts across five categories, including injury impact, social impact, autonomy, financial loss, and care awards (Gareth Davies, Apr 2026).

I recommend that, with reference to the status of awards: a) eligible infected and affected persons should not be required to accept the offer of an award in full and final settlement of any right to pursue legal actions related to the infection; b) any accepted scheme award should be set off against any entitlement to damages for the same subject matter; c) the availability of an award under the scheme should be a factor to which the court could have regard when determining liability for costs in any court proceedings related to the infection.

The UK Government stated in December 2024 that acceptance of an award does not require applicants to waive their right to pursue litigation, and that infected persons may return to IBCA for reassessment at any time if their condition deteriorates following an initial assessment (Cabinet Office response, Dec 2024). The record holds no update since the UK Government's response of December 2024 (Cabinet Office response, Dec 2024).

I recommend that: a) awards should be made in a lump sum in respect of an Injury Impact Award, Social Impact Award, Autonomy Award, and an award to compensate for past losses under the Care Award and Financial Loss Award for infected and affected persons; b) at the option of the applicant, for continuing future losses under the Care Award and Financial Loss Award, there should be paid either a lump sum award or payment by way of guaranteed periodical payments uplifted annually for inflation for life, or the predicted period of the loss, if earlier; c) an infected person should have the option of receiving a lesser lump sum as a provisional award (i.e. one assessed on the footing that as a result of receiving infected blood or blood products or tissue transfer there is a chance that at some definite or indefinite time in the future they will develop some serious disease or suffer some serious deterioration in their physical or mental health) such that in that case they may return to the scheme, or in accordance with arrangements to be made by the scheme, for further compensation then to be paid in respect of the newly developed disease or deterioration; and d) unless the option to have a provisional award is taken, all awards should be final.

The UK Government stated in December 2024 that acceptance of an award does not require applicants to waive their right to pursue litigation (Cabinet Office response, Dec 2024). It added that if an infected person's condition deteriorates, they will be able to return to IBCA at any time for reassessment to determine eligibility for an additional compensation payment, regardless of the time that has passed since their initial assessment (Cabinet Office response, Dec 2024). The record holds no update since the UK Government's response of December 2024 (Cabinet Office response, Dec 2024).

I recommend that interest be payable on awards for past financial losses and past provision of care, from the date of infection to the date of the award, in accordance with the practice in personal injury damages claims; alternatively, that such awards are uplifted for inflation during that period.

The UK Government stated in December 2024 that the compensation scheme "aligns with the spirit of the recommendation regarding interest payable on past financial loss" by applying the current median annual salary plus 5% to all past working years rather than historical rates, meaning interest is not payable (Cabinet Office response, Dec 2024). The record holds no update since the UK Government's response of December 2024 (Cabinet Office response, Dec 2024).

I recommend that an interim payment of £100,000 should be paid to recognise the deaths of people to date unrecognised and alleviate immediate suffering. This should be done as follows: a) where someone infected died as a child or died as an adult without a partner or child, the interim payment should be made to their bereaved parents (split equally if separated); b) where someone infected has died and there is no bereaved partner but there is a bereaved child or children (including any adopted child), the interim payment should be paid to the child or children (split equally); and c) where someone infected has died and there is no bereaved partner, child nor parent but there is a bereaved full sibling or siblings, the interim payment should be paid to the sibling or siblings (split equally).

The Inquiry recommended £100,000 interim payments to bereaved parents, children, or siblings of deceased victims. In May 2025, the UK Government stated that it had opened applications for £100,000 interim payments to the estates of deceased infected people to respect their wills, rather than paying bereaved parents, children, or siblings directly (Cabinet Office response, May 2025). In July 2026, the Infected Blood Compensation Authority reported that the Government committed under the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 to make £100,000 interim payments to estates where no compensation had been paid (Infected Blood Compensation Authority, Jul 2026).

I recommend that, with regard to the relationship between compensation, support payments and benefits: a) in assessing compensation under the scheme, no account should be taken of any past payments made under the support schemes or their predecessors; b) the current annual payments under the support schemes should be continued (or merged into the compensation scheme) and guaranteed for life, by legislation or secure government undertaking; c) such continued payments should be taken into account in assessing awards for future financial loss or care provision; d) such deductions as would be made from damages under the Social Security (Recovery of Benefits) Act 1997, but no other, should be made in respect of equivalent awards under the scheme; e) awards of financial loss should be made net of tax, but the awards themselves should not be liable to taxation, and should be regarded for tax purposes as if they were support payments; f) any lump sum award under the scheme should be made exempt from inheritance tax by an equivalent addition to the inheritance tax free allowance of the recipient.

The UK Government stated in May 2025 that all payments made under the scheme, including those received via an infected person's estate, will be exempt from income tax, capital gains tax, and inheritance tax, and disregarded from means-tested benefit assessments such as council tax and nursing home fees (Cabinet Office response, May 2025). The record holds no update since the UK Government's response of May 2025 (Cabinet Office response, May 2025).

I recommend that an Arms Length Body (ALB) should be set up to administer the compensation scheme, with guaranteed independence of judgement, chaired by a judge of High Court or Court of Session status as sole decision maker, transparent in its procedures so far as the law permits and accountable directly to Parliament for the expenditure of public funds and the fulfilment of its terms of reference. Appeals should be to a bespoke independent appeal body with a legal chair which will reconsider the decision of the scheme in any case appealed to it. The scheme should have procedures in accordance with the principles set out in this report and in particular which: a) have regard to the need of applicants for speed of provision, simplicity of process, accessibility, involvement, proactive support, fairness and efficiency; b) involve potentially eligible persons and their representatives amongst those in a small advisory board, and in the review and improvement of the scheme; and c) permit the hearing of applicants in person. d) should have access to the records held by or on behalf of any previous publicly funded support scheme (subject to any necessary consents by the data subjects), and take into account the reasoning of any appeal from the decisions it takes.

The Inquiry recommended establishing an independent arm's-length body to administer the compensation scheme. In May 2025, the UK Government stated that it had established the Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA) to deliver compensation UK-wide, though a judicial chair and bespoke appeal body were not mentioned (Cabinet Office response, May 2025). In September 2026, the Committee of Public Accounts reported that "only the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme is run independently of the department or organisation responsible for the original harm" (Committee of Public Accounts, Sep 2026). In June 2026, Sir Brian Langstaff told a parliamentary committee that the authority was designed without the involvement of affected individuals (Sir Brian Langstaff, Jun 2026).

I recommend that the scheme should include provision of the following support services to be provided without charge to the applicant: a) an advice and advocacy service, supplemented where necessary by discretionary access to independent legal advice and representation, where necessary and within a pre-authorised budget, to assist and advise applicants; b) a financial, insurance and benefits advice and support service, to assist recipients in accessing financial and insurance services and obtaining any relevant benefits; and c) advice and referral to appropriate specialist services, signalling or certifying access to any special arrangements.

The Inquiry asked the UK Government to provide free advocacy, legal, financial, and referral support. In May 2025, the UK Government stated that psychological support was available or expanding across the UK and that the Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA) aims to ensure support is available for managing awards, accessing financial services, and benefits advice (Cabinet Office response, May 2025). The response did not describe advocacy services or referral to specialist services (Cabinet Office response, May 2025). In April 2026, the National Audit Office found that the authority covers the cost of legal advice for applicants throughout their claim (Gareth Davies, Apr 2026).

I recommend that the compensation scheme should be delivered by one central body, appropriately resourced and staffed. Current support schemes should however continue to be provided as at present by schemes local to each nation.

The Inquiry recommended that a single central body deliver compensation alongside local support schemes. In May 2025, the UK Government stated that the Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA) had been established to deliver compensation across the UK and that support scheme payments would continue for life for those registered before April 2025 (Cabinet Office response, May 2025). The National Audit Office reported in April 2026 that the government set up the UK-wide body in May 2024 under Cabinet Office sponsorship (Gareth Davies, Apr 2026).

I recommend that without delay steps be taken to provide a bespoke psychological service in England.

The UK Government stated in May 2025 that it was committed to offering psychological support, noting that bespoke services were already available in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, while England's Infected Blood Psychological Service began seeing patients in August 2024 with capacity building toward nationwide coverage by spring 2025 (Cabinet Office response, May 2025). The record holds no update since the UK Government's response of May 2025 (Cabinet Office response, May 2025).

I recommend that a compensation scheme should be set up now and it should begin work this year.

The Inquiry recommended the immediate establishment of an operational compensation scheme. In May 2025, the UK Government stated that it had responded following the publication of the Inquiry's May 2024 report by establishing the compensation scheme (Cabinet Office response, May 2025). In April 2026, the National Audit Office reported that regulations came into force in August 2024, establishing the Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA) and enabling payments to infected individuals and affected estates (Gareth Davies, Apr 2026).