Susan and Alan Carpenter lost their case

High Court judge Mr Justice Gage ruled the NHS was negligent in taking body parts without permission.

He said around two thirds of more than 2,000 families suing the NHS were likely to be entitled to pay-outs for the psychological damage they suffered.

The action centred on three test cases involving organ removal and retention.

'Duty of care'

Claimants whose children had hospital post mortems may receive compensation, as Mr Gage found doctors had owed a "duty of care" to them when obtaining consent for a post-mortem.

We now know that, thanks to today's decision, this will never happen again Alan Carpenter 'A moral wrong has been done'

But he said those who had post mortems carried out by coroners will not be able to claim.

The three cases before the court involved babies Rosina Harris, Daniel Carpenter and Laura Shorter, who all had body parts removed after their deaths.

The judge gave judgment in favour of Denise Shorter, from Oxfordshire, in the sum of �2,750.

But he dismissed claims in cases brought by Alan and Susan Carpenter and Karen and David Harris.

Mr Harris, from Dorchester, said: "No-one else will now have to live through the nightmare we've been put through over the last few years.

"We wanted three things. One, for the law to be changed, which is happening. Two, to get someone to apologise - hopefully that will now happen - and thirdly a recognition of what they were doing was wrong, and today that has been proved."

Permission

When his daughter Rosina died, the family gave permission for samples to be taken from her body, but her entire heart, lungs and spinal cord were removed.

Mr Carpenter, father of Daniel, from Norfolk, said: "We've done what we hoped to do, which was to bring this process out into the public and to force them to air their dirty laundry in the open.

"We now know that, thanks to today's decision, this will never happen again."

Mr Justice Gage said in his ruling: "The practice of not warning parents, and in particular a mother, that a post-mortem might involve the removal and subsequent retention of an organ cannot be justified as a practice to be adopted in all cases."

Intentions

The Royal College of Pathologists said the doctors involved in the lead cases had had good intentions, which were to establish why the deaths had occurred.

The Human Tissue Bill, currently before Parliament, makes it compulsory to gain consent before taking organs. Doctors who do not do so could face up to three years in prison.

Mervyn Fudge, one of the solicitors for the claimants, said he hoped agreement could now be reached with the NHS on compensation for the families whose children had hospital post-mortems without the need to pursue further court cases.

The NHS Litigation Authority, which had challenged the parents' claims, said it had recognised at the outset of the case that some claimants would be entitled to compensation and it had "made a substantial offer of compensation to the group", which was rejected.

The scandal first came to light during the Bristol heart babies controversy in 1999. It was discovered that 170 hearts were removed during post mortem examinations without consent.

Alder Hey Children's Hospital in Liverpool revealed shortly afterwards that hundreds of organs were being stored in a lab occupied by the University of Liverpool.