A child was left severely brain damaged because a Government failed to issue a warning about aspirin fast enough, a court heard.

Amanda Smith, 22, of Crowborough, was a healthy six-year-old when she contracted chicken pox in May 1986 and was given adult aspirin by her mother Jenny.

The High Court in London heard yesterday Amanda's condition deteriorated into a severe neurological illness, Reye's syndrome.

Despite expert care at London's Guy's Hospital, she was left with brain damage, a form of spastic quadriplegia and epilepsy. She is not expected to live beyond 40.

Amanda has launched a damages action through her mother against the Health Secretary on behalf of the Committee on Safety of Medicines (CSM).

Her counsel, Lord Brennan, told Mr Justice Morland he would have to decide whether, between March and June 1986, the defendant owed a duty of care to warn that young children - in particular those with chicken pox - should not be given aspirin.

If such a duty was owed, there was a question about whether the defendant was in breach of it by failing to give such a warning until June 10, 1986.

There was also an issue about whether, depending on the timing and nature of the warning that should have been given, Amanda's family would have been aware of it, so as to avoid giving her aspirin in May.

Lord Brennan said the CSM had determined at its meeting on March 26, 1986, that aspirin might be a contributory factor in causing Reye's syndrome.

It had decided it could lead to death or grave disability and action was necessary to prevent the use of aspirin by children.

The syndrome, viral in origin, can affect children suffering chicken pox, influenza and similar viral conditions, causing inflammation of the brain and, in some cases, liver damage.

Lord Brennan said: "Having decided that action was necessary, the CSM and civil servants then took until June 10, one day short of 11 weeks, to give a public warning."

He argued that, having taken the decision in principle on March 26, the CSM and associated civil servants were required to give the warning as soon as possible so as to avoid the serious risk of injury or death to a significant number of children.

He said the public warning should have been given by April 10, two weeks after the meeting, or no later than mid-May.

The hearing, in which negligence and liability is denied, continues.