The BBC's Health Correspondent Karen Allen : "That judgement will now be tested in the court of appeal"

East Kent Health Authority and the NHS Litigation Authority fear the ruling may destroy the national screening programme because it sets standards of accuracy that are near impossible to achieve.

They estimate an extra one million women a year would have to be called back for further tests - most of which would be unnecessary.

But the women's solicitor has said the appeal is a waste of NHS funds.

Women needed hysterectomies

The blunders took place at Kent and Canterbury Hospital

Eight women died, 30 needed hysterectomies and more than 90,000 women had their tests re-examined after mistakes at the Kent and Canterbury Hospital between 1989 and 1995.

The authority has paid more than £1m to 47 women, but the three women were among 14 cases the authority had disputed.

Helen Palmer, Sandra Penney and Lesley Cannon, who won their case in February, said their lives were destroyed by the blunders.

They developed cervical cancer and had to have hysterectomies while they were in their 30s.

None of the three women will be giving evidence at the appeal, as they are all quite ill. They will, however, be attending court.

'No screening is perfect'

Figures from the Imperial Cancer Research Fund suggest the NHS Cervical Screening Programme prevents up to 3,900 cancers each year.

Doctors accept that no screening process is perfect and there will always be a margin of error - their task is to reduce that margin as much as is possible.

But the High Court ruling demands too high a level of accuracy given today's technology, the litigation authority says.

Lawyers for the health authority and the hospital argued at the High Court that the women's smears were borderline and that they were suffering from a very rare type of cancer. They said the screeners had made excusable errors in passing the slides.

The judge rejected this argument and said the screeners should have sent the samples for further tests.

'No desire to prolong suffering'

Stephen Walker is chief executive of the NHS Litigation Authority, which is effectively an insurer for NHS Trusts.

At the time of the High Court ruling, he said: "We have no wish to prolong the suffering of the three women who brought this case against the Kent and Canterbury Hospitals Laboratory, but this judgement puts the whole screening programme at risk.

"It would demand a level of accuracy which present screening techniques cannot deliver.

"This appeal is not directed against the three women and we regret the continuing strain it will impose on them."

But Sarah Harman, the women's solicitor, said she was amazed at the decision to appeal, and said the move would dent confidence in the screening programme.