Ross G. Anderson

Ross is ranked by Chambers & Partners (2025) as a Band 1 junior for Commercial Dispute Resolution, Company, Real Estate Litigation, and Restructuring/ Insolvency. He is also ranked for Tax. He is ranked in the Legal 500 (2025) as a Band 1 Leading Junior in Commercial Disputes, Administrative and Public Law, and Property and Construction.

“Ross is one of the best non-silks. He gives clients a lot of assurance and he is also seen as one of the leading advocates in all of Scotland” (Chambers 2025)

Ross is one of the best juniors at the Scottish Bar. He’s a joy to work with and there is no case which is too complex” (Chambers 2025)

“Ross is a go-to counsel for property disputes. He is very accessible, bright and the quality of his written work is very good. In my view, he has the experience to deal alone with complex matters.” (Chambers, 2025)

“Ross has an ability to crack on with complex factual matters and really understand the factual issues, which then allows him to be one step ahead in relation to the legal arguments.” (Chambers, 2025)

“He is a first-rate junior counsel – a go-to advocate in commercial, property and sports disputes. He is excellent to work with.” “He is incredibly intellectually sharp, and his opinions and analysis are first rate.” (Chambers 2023)

“Ross is excellent with clients; he has a brilliant ability to appease and calm clients while also being firm, decisive and straight-talking. He is very thorough and has a fantastic sense of commerciality. He is very able on his feet and he has got an amazing ability to get to grips with vast quantities of documentation and huge amounts of detail” (Chambers, 2021, Commercial Dispute Resolution)

“Highly intelligent, great with clients and very approachable.” (Chambers, Commercial Dispute Resolution, 2020)

“Very thorough and gets to grips with complex issues quickly. He’s so commercial, practical in his approach and proactive. He is hugely impressive.” (Chambers 2020)

“Very impressive ability to translate academic skills into practical advice to clients. Good on his feet as well” (Chambers, 2019) “He’s a junior with an extremely good sense of commerciality and pragmatism and has an excellent manner when dealing with solicitors and clients.” “He’s very good on particularly complex technical disputes.” (Chambers, 2018)

Ross’s practice focuses on commercial dispute resolution, company and insolvency law, property law, public law, trusts and tax. Ross is a standing junior counsel to the UK Government (having been assigned to HM Revenue & Customs from 2015-2024). He appears regularly in UK tribunals as well as in the Court of Session.

Selected cases:

Back

Vinit Khurana KC

Vinit Khurana KC is the only practising member of the Scottish Bar dually qualified in law and medicine. He has the unique distinction of having practised as a medical General Practitioner for over a decade as well as being an Advocate since 1999. He took silk in 2018.

Vinit has a wide ranging practice involving both appearance and advisory work. He has experience of acting for and against private individuals and corporations. He also has experience of acing for and against public bodies. He regularly acts for and against health boards in professional negligence and personal injury cases.

Vinit specialises in all aspects of Medical Law including clinical negligence, judicial review, professional disciplinary matters, regulatory work and mental health. He is one of the most experienced practitioners at the Scottish Bar in relation to Fatal Accident Inquiries having appeared at over 20 such Inquiries since 2000. Since calling in 1999 his medical knowledge has proven to be a valuable asset in a wide variety of cases. His instructions have encompassed both civil and criminal work. Examples of the breadth of his instructions include: fraud cases brought by Health Boards against Optometrists before the NHS Tribunal; the chairing of the NHS Classification Appeal Committee in respect of disciplinary matters; appearances on behalf of the National Appeal Panel in judicial review petitions for entry to the pharmaceutical list; and advisory work in connection with many other matters related to the provision of healthcare including competition law issues in the provision of dispensing services by pharmacists and GPs, optometric and pharmaceutical services regulation, contractual arrangements between Health Boards and GP primary care providers, mental health matters and ECHR issues in the areas of organ donation and treatment refusal.

Vinit was the Chair of the Faculty of Advocates Sub-Committee which responded to the Scottish Government’s consultation on the reform of mental health legislation. He has also responded on behalf of the Faculty of Advocates to Scottish Government consultations on organ donation and transplant. He is currently a member of the Faculty Committee that oversees all of the Faculty’s responses to Scottish Government consultations.

Throughout his career Vinit has been prepared to work in new areas. He enjoys new challenges. He is a conscientious and hard worker. This has allowed him to gain an understanding of the particular circumstances of and the legal background to the cases in which he has been instructed. As well as appearing in court in complex, high profile and urgent matters, he regularly provides written advice on a wide variety of matters.

Vinit was called to the Bar of England & Wales in 2019. He can accept instructions in England and Wales via his clerks at Whitestone Chambers.

Back

Ailsa Wilson KC

Ailsa Wilson KC has practised widely in various areas of the law since calling to the Bar in 1993, as reflected by the range of areas of interest. More recently, the focus of her practice has been on land-related disputes that include planning, environmental and other statutory regimes. The cases in which she has been involved, either representing parties at hearings or providing advice, cover not only statutory consents procedures but also compulsory purchase and compensation claims. She has considerable experience with infrastructure proposals for both promoters and objectors. Her experience also includes the more detailed disputes that arise from the regulatory environmental protection regime, such as appeals against decisions by SEPA.

Ailsa Wilson’s practice involves providing advice in relation to a broad range of issues that can arise from land ownership, such as property rights and contractual obligations associated with development of land. It also covers interference with property rights and recently she acted for the access authority in a test case under the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 in respect of Kinfauns Estate owned by Ann Gloag.

These areas of practice often give rise to public inquiries, appeals to either the Sheriff Court or Court of Session, and applications for judicial review. Separately as a Standing Junior to the Advocate General, Ailsa Wilson has gained considerable experience in administrative and public law areas such education, immigration, human rights and competition law.

Selected recent Cases

Back

Euan G Mackenzie KC

Euan Mackenzie K C is regularly instructed in cases of high value, importance and complexity in the field of medical negligence and personal injury. He has particular expertise in public law, public inquiries, planning and environmental law as well as personal injury and medical negligence. He has many years experience of preparing and conducting cases in the Court of Session and in other courts and tribunals. His clients include the Scottish Government, public sector bodies, commercial organisations, health boards, medical defence unions, local action groups and individuals. He was a standing Junior Counsel to the Scottish Government between 2006 and 2016. He was Junior Counsel to the Penrose Public Inquiry between 2009 and 2014 and second Senior Counsel to the Edinburgh Trams Public Inquiry from 2014 to 2019. He took Silk in 2016.

Back

Una Doherty appointed as part-time Legal Assessor

Ampersand’s Una Doherty has been appointed as a part-time Legal Assessor to the General Teaching Council of Scotland (“GTCS”). Legal assessors act as independent legal advisers to the GTCS’s Fitness to Teach panels, and ensure that the proceedings before the panels are conducted in accordance with the law and the procedural rules.

Back

Paul Reid: How Fixed Is a Fixed-term Parliament?

However unexpected the Prime Minister’s call for a general election may be, and however appropriate it may, or may not, be (see Jeff King’s discussion here), it invites the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act 2011 to operate as it was designed: if two-thirds of the House of Commons resolves that there should be an early general election (for whatever reason) then there shall be an early general election. Whether MP’s should vote for such a motion is a question of politics; but the law is operating as it should do. And if an election does take place on 8 June, the next again UK general election will be on 5 May 2022 (and the five-year cycle continues thereafter). But holding a UK general election in June 2017 raises two interesting points when set in the context of the fixed-term parliament arrangements in Scotland. First is the date of the next UK general election (which will be 5 May 2022). Under the 2011 Act, where an early general election is called, the 5-year clock is more or less reset: hold the election before first Thursday in May and the next election is on the first Thursday in May in the fourth calendar year after the election; hold it after and it is the fifth calendar year following the election (s.1(4) of 2011 Act). In other words, holding an “early” general election breaks the planned cycle of general elections. Contrast that to what happens where there is an early election under the Scotland Act: unless that “extraordinary” general election takes place within six months of a planned “ordinary” general election it has no effect on the four-year cycle of elections (s.3(3) of the 1998 Act). Even then, the four-year cycle continues as planned. For example, if an extraordinary general election was held in the February before a planned ordinary general election, the next general election would still take place on the first Thursday in May four years after the election (just that parliamentary session would be 4 years and 3 months long). But the fixed cycle more or less continues. It is not clear why the Westminster model resets the clock whereas the Holyrood model does not. It appears to be just another one of those anomalies that arises from the piecemeal way in which the constitution has been changed. But from what was said by the Prime Minister, it seems very unlikely that she would have sought an election in June 2017 if, as would be the case under the Scottish system, it would not have reset the five-year period and the May 2020 election would have proceeded as planned. Second is the date of the next Scottish Parliamentary election. It was due to be held on 7 May 2020 (four years after the previous election: Scotland Act 1998, s.2(2)). That clashed with the scheduled UK general election with the result that the Scottish Parliament was given the power to vary the date (Scotland Act 1998 (Modification of Schedules 4 and 5) Order 2015). That power has been exercised by the Scottish Parliament: Scottish Elections (Dates) Act 2016. Under that Act, the next Scottish Parliamentary election will take place on 6 May 2021 (s.1(2)). That is, for the second successive session, the Scottish Parliament’s four-year “fixed” term will be extended to a fifth year. And that, obviously, only deferred the problem until 2025 when both polls would have again been scheduled for the first Thursday in May. Of course, the 2016 Act is now entirely unnecessary because there will be no clash in 2020 and the Scottish election could have taken place as “planned”. But it is on the statute book and it must be extremely unlikely that it will be repealed now the clash will be avoided. So, the next Scottish general election will take place on 6 May 2021 (even if a snap election were to be called in Scotland at any time before 6 November 2020, 6-months before the planned election). The previous extension of the Scottish Parliament’s four-year “fixed” term was made by the s.4(2) of the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act 2011 so as to avoid the 2016 clash of dates (which simply gave rise to the anticipated 2020 clash of dates). Assuming things return to normal, and Westminster and Holyrood revert to their five and four-year cycles, respectively, the next clash should not take place until May 2037. Although that is some time off, it may be that there is now a convention that where the dates clash, the life of the Scottish Parliament is extended by a year. That, of course, simply delays the problem for one parliamentary cycle rather than solving it: delay the 2037 Scottish election until 2038 and then there is a clash in 2042 (and so on and so on…). But all of that assumes there are no further early UK general elections. And the term fixed by the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act looks rather more flexible than it did a week ago.

The fixed-term regime that is in place for both Westminster and Holyrood could only ever be a holding position, with date clashes being inevitable. So far, that has seen the Scottish Parliament slowly moving to a five-year term as clash-after-clash with Westminster elections was deferred for another few years (incidentally, it was never clear why a five-year term was picked: it was the maximum under the Parliament Act 1911 and it is longer than many other European legislatures). One consequence of this snap election is that the cycle of repeated clashes has been deferred for 20 years. In that time, hopefully, a longer-term solution can be found. Such a solution would seem to require the parliamentary cycles of Westminster and Holyrood to be aligned and the rules on the consequence of an “early” or “extraordinary” general election to be harmonised. But with everything else that is going on, I rather expect this particular wrinkle of the constitution will be left un-ironed until it next raises its head, which should be some time in the mid-2030’s. Or, of course, perhaps what we have just witnessed is the (de facto) revival of the Prime Minister’s prerogative as to the timing of elections (who else would be likely to credibly propose a motion for an early general election?) and the result of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011 will not be so much to fix the term of Parliament but simply to require the Prime Minister to get endorsement of her decision from the House of Commons. And if that is so, it is a reminder that the UK constitution remains very much a political constitution. Paul Reid, Advocate. Paul Reid is a member of Ampersand Stable and part-time tutor of Public Law at the University of Edinburgh. – See more at: http://www.ampersandstable.com/evoke/news/668/view#sthash.mpfwtD1W.dpuf

Back