LONDON (Reuters) - The mother of a three-year-old boy who was struck 11 times with a metal bar by a boy of the same age has won the right to compensation, despite authorities twice refusing to pay out on the grounds the perpetrator was too young to have known what he was doing.

The compensation ruling is the first of its kind under the English legal system, according to lawyers representing the victim.

Jay Jones, of Wirral, Merseyside, needed stitches to his face and head after he was repeatedly attacked while the boys were left alone in a car.

His mother Renai Williams said the Tribunals Service ruled in her favour despite the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) twice refusing to pay out after disputing whether such a young child could be guilty of a crime of violence.

She said the injuries were so bad they left her son looking like the “Elephant Man.”

“This has been a long and hard-fought process. We have been knocked back twice by the CICA because, in my opinion, they didn’t take my son’s case seriously,” she told BBC television.

“My son was hit 11 times on his head and face with a car jack, his attacker kept on lashing out even though Jay was screaming out in pain and covered in blood.

“It was a vicious attack with such force that his attacker, who was also only three himself, managed to crack the car windscreen.”

Jay’s assailant cannot be named for legal reasons. And because of his age he cannot be prosecuted for the offence and is currently in the care of social services.

The age of criminal responsibility in England, Wales and Northern Ireland is 10.

Representing the battered child, Michelle Armstrong of Kirwans Solicitors said the incident was a deliberate act of violence that would have constituted a crime had it not been for the age of the attacker.

“He suffered nightmares and bed-wetting for months afterwards and was terrified to go anywhere on his own, or near windows, because it reminded him of being in the car,” she said.

Armstrong said the CICA rejected the case after questioning whether the actions of a three-year-old perpetrator could constitute a “crime of violence.”

“We argued that the age of the perpetrator was irrelevant when claiming compensation from the CICA. And it was on this point that we won,” she said in a statement.

“The next step in the process will be to present evidence of the injuries and the effects of the incident on the child, including medical evidence, to a Tribunal Judge so that a compensation award can be considered.”