Michael Way
Michael Way’s principle areas of practice are public & administrative law, commercial disputes and civil liberties/human rights.
Michael is listed as a ‘Rising Star’ in the 2021/22 Legal 500 in both Commercial Disputes and Administrative and Public Law.
“A brilliant advocate – insightful, thorough and refreshingly convincing on his feet, he is approachable and easy to work with.” – Legal 500 2021/22 ‘Administrative and Public Law’
After spending several years as a performer in the music industry, Michael trained with one of Scotland’s leading commercial law firms and undertook a six month secondment to the Scottish Government Legal Directorate. Shortly after qualifying as a solicitor Michael began devilling, during which he won the Mike Jones Excellence in Advocacy prize and was the Faculty Scholar 2018/19.
Since calling, Michael has appeared regularly in courts and tribunals throughout Scotland. In particular, he has:
- appeared for Serco defending over 150 interdict actions, including appearances in the Sheriff Appeal Court and instruction during the related Inner House reclaiming motion process;
- been instructed by petitioners in a number of successful Court of Session judicial review actions in immigration and housing matters;
- instructed by child respondents in nobile officium petitions seeking recognition of English High Court deprivation of liberty orders;
- appeared frequently for the Advocate General as a standing ‘junior junior’ in the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber);
- been instructed in a variety of property, contractual, professional negligence, debt recovery and insolvency disputes, including success after proof in a case involving a challenge to interest to enforce real burdens;
- developed a proficiency in consumer rights issues, including claims under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations 2008;
- assisted in a major offshore dispute in Jersey;
- undertaken criminal appeal work, with successful appearances in the High Court and Sheriff Appeal Court.
Michael has a strong academic background with degrees from Oxford, King’s College London and Edinburgh. Since 2015, Michael has tutored at the University of Edinburgh (Jurisprudence; Critical Legal Thinking) and was previously a guest lecturer in Business Law at Queen Margaret University. He was the research assistant to Lady Poole and Sheriffs McCartney and Drummond on their recent book A Practical Guide to Public Law Litigation in Scotland (2019; W.Green)
Back
Faculty of Advocates support for human rights National Taskforce
Plans to set up a National Taskforce for Human Rights Leadership have been applauded by the Faculty of Advocates Human Rights and Rule of Law Committee (HRRoL).
The Scottish Government says the Taskforce is to be co-chaired by Shirley Anne Somerville, Cabinet Secretary for Social Security and Older People, and Professor Alan Miller of Strathclyde University.
Its purpose will be to “ensure Scotland is a world leader in putting human rights into practice”.
Ampersand’s Euan Mackenzie QC, of HRRoL, said: “The announcement of the National Taskforce is welcome news for the future of human rights in Scotland. The creation of enforceable rights in areas such as housing, health and social security will make a real difference to people’s lives.
“Alongside the work already under way to incorporate the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), the National Taskforce will cement Scotland’s ambition to provide human rights leadership in these challenging times.
“We look forward to engaging with others in this important work.”
Details of the Taskforce can be found here.
Back
Ampersand advocates appointed to EHRC panel of counsel
Ampersand welcomes the appointment of Vinit Khurana QC, Ross Anderson and Graham Maciver to the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) panel of counsel.
They join Dorothy Bain QC, Aidan O’Neill QC and Laura-Anne van Westhuizen who were re-appointed to the panel.
Members of the Commission’s panel of counsel are the preferred providers of external legal services, including representation and advice. These services support the EHRC’s advisory, influencing, regulatory and enforcement work across the equality and human rights spheres, including strategic litigation in domestic and European courts.
These appointments are for a period of 4 years.
Further information on the work of the EHRC and the full panel of counsel can be found on the EHRC website here.
Back
Success for Ampersand silk in Alex Salmond Judicial Review
Former First Minister Alex Salmond has won his judicial review challenging a finding that he sexually harassed two women during his time in office, after the Scottish Government conceded that it breached its own guidelines by appointing an investigating officer who had prior involvement with the complainers.
Ampersand’s Ronnie Clancy QC acting for Alex Salmond appeared at a Motion in the Court of Session today ahead of the Substantive hearing set down next week. Lord Pentland approved a settlement in which the Scottish Government accepted that its actions had been “unlawful in respect that they were procedurally unfair”, “tainted with apparent bias” and that the decision should be set aside with investigation reports struck down. Parties also agreed expenses.
Press coverage can be found here.
Back
Case C-621/18 Wightman and others – Decision of the European Court of Justice
The European Court of Justice ruled that the United Kingdom may, if it chooses to, unilaterally revoke its notification of intention to withdraw from the European Union.
Judicial review was brought by a cross-party group of elected politicians from constituencies in Scotland. They wanted to know whether they had the option of voting for the UK staying in the EU, if they thought that that course offered better protection for their constituents than the UK leaving the EU on the basis of the Government’s withdrawal deal.
Court of Session referred the question of EU law which they had raised to the European Court of Justice for its guidance. The UK Supreme Court rejected an appeal. Matter now comes back to the court in Scotland for its final ruling.
They have been represented at every stage in this case by Ampersand’s Aidan O’Neill QC who was instructed as leading counsel by Elaine Motion, Balfour + Manson LLP. Assisted by David Welsh, Advocate and, before the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, also by Maya Lester QC and Professor Piet Eeckhout.
The press release from the Court of Justice of the European Union can be found here and full decision here.
Back
Case C-621/18 Wightman and others – Decision of the European Court of Justice
The European Court of Justice has today ruled in Case C-621/18 Wightman and others that the United Kingdom may, if it chooses to, unilaterally revoke its notification of intention to withdraw from the European Union.
This ruling of the Court affirms both the sovereignty of the United Kingdom as a nation, and the sovereignty of the UK Parliament.
Parliament can instruct the Government either to continue with the current negotiations around the UK’s withdrawal, or to bring an end to that process and keep the UK in the EU on the basis of its present membership deal.
This means that it is open to Parliament, if so minded, to “call off Brexit” so that the UK stays in the EU on its existing terms.
This would involve the UK keeping the Pound, maintaining its border controls, and holding on to its current EU budget rebate, while continuing to benefit from frictionless and tariff-free trade within the European Union and profiting from the free trade deals which the EU is able to conclude, from a position of world market strength, with third countries outside the EU.
It also means that British nationals would retain all the additional rights that come with their being EU citizens, including the rights to live and work in, receive healthcare from, and retire to, the rest of the EU.
In so ruling, the Court of Justice rejected the arguments of the two main EU institutions – the Council of Ministers and the European Commission – that the consent of all the other Member States would be needed for any revocation of the UK’s withdrawal to be effective.
Instead, the Court ruled that any choice to stay in the EU was for the UK alone. This could be done at any time, while the Treaties still applied to the UK (whether in the two year period from initial notification or in any extension of this period agreed with the European Council).
All that would be required would be a decision to remain, taken in accord with the UK’s constitutional requirements and then duly notified to the President of the European Council.
This judicial review was brought by a cross-party group of elected politicians from constituencies in Scotland. They wanted to know whether they had the option of voting for the UK staying in the EU, if they thought that that course offered better protection for their constituents than the UK leaving the EU on the basis of the Government’s withdrawal deal.
The case was taken by them before the Court of Session in Edinburgh, which referred the question of EU law which they had raised to the European Court of Justice for its guidance. The UK Supreme Court rejected an attempt by the UK Government to block this reference. The matter now comes back to the court in Scotland for its final ruling.
The Scottish politicians – Andy Wightman MSP, Ross Greer MSP, Alyn Smith MEP, David Martin MEP, Catherine Stihler MEP, and Joanna Cherry QC MP – were supported throughout this case by Jolyon Maugham QC, director of the Good Law Project, who organised crowd funding support.
They have been represented at every stage in this case by Ampersand’s Aidan O’Neill QC who was instructed as leading counsel by Elaine Motion, Chairman of the Edinburgh law firm, Balfour + Manson LLP. He was assisted by David Welsh, Advocate and, before the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, also by Maya Lester QC and Professor Piet Eeckhout.
The press release from the Court of Justice of the European Union can be found here and full decision here.
Back
