Ampersand Advocates ranked as top tier set by Legal 500 in 2023 guide
Ampersand is delighted to once again be recommended as a top-tier set by The Legal 500 UK Bar Directory in their latest listings for the 2023 guide. Listed as tier 1 in Administrative & Public Law, Personal Injury & Medical Negligence and Property, Planning & Construction, and tier 2 in Commercial Disputes, Ampersand has collected 22 Senior Counsel rankings, 21 Junior Counsel rankings, including 2 rising stars, across the Scottish Bar listings.
Administrative and Public Law
TIER 1
Ampersand Advocates is home to a team of ‘excellent public and administrative law counsel‘. In a prominent case highlight, Douglas Ross KC and Paul Reid represented the Scottish Ministers in Fair Play for Women Limited v Registrar General for Scotland & Scottish Ministers, concerning a judicial review challenging the guidance issued to accompany the “sex question” in the 2022 Scottish census; the review was refused and the challenge thrown out. Aidan O’Neill KC (who has dual tenancy with London-based set Matrix Chambers) garners praise for his ‘outstanding knowledge‘, and successfully acted for rewilding charity Trees for Life in a judicial review brought against Scottish Government agency NatureScot, on the grounds that the agency’s policy of issuing licences to cull beavers was unlawful.
Testimonials
Stable
‘Very helpful and responsive.’
‘Considerable strength in depth.’
Leading silks
Band 1
Aidan O’Neill KC – Ampersand Advocates ‘Aidan is beyond talented. He thinks of novel and innovative approaches to arguments, as well as having an extraordinary base of legal and historical knowledge which can be brought to bear.’
Douglas Ross KC – Ampersand Advocates ‘Douglas excels at seeing a clear route to a sound and practical solution through competing arguments. He has the confidence of clients in a tight situation and the total respect of the court; he wears his learning lightly and deploys it persuasively. He is an ideal public law silk.‘
Band 2
Susanne Tanner KC
Leading juniors
Band 1
Paul Reid
Band 2
Ross Anderson
Usman Tariq
Timothy Young – Ampersand Advocates ‘Timothy has a pragmatic approach to cases. He is an extremely safe pair of hands.’
Rising Star
Michael Way – Ampersand Advocates ‘Michael is exceptionally thorough and meticulous, very insightful in his drafting, and exceptional on his feet.‘
Commercial Disputes
TIER 2
Viewed as ‘one of the best stables for commercial disputes counsel‘, Ampersand Advocates‘ team fields expertise in handling insolvency matters, IP-related cases and professional negligence issues, to name a few. Laura-Anne Van Der Westhuizen KC has notable experience in advising on commercial disputes with planning and real estate elements. Graeme Hawkes KC is ‘very responsive‘ and regularly acts in litigation involving commercial contracts. Timothy Young ‘delivers complex legal issues in an easy to understand and pragmatic way‘. Shareholder disputes form a core pillar of Paul Reid‘s practice.
Testimonials
Stable
‘Good pool of advocates.’
‘Extremely efficient, friendly and responsive.’
Leading silks
Band 2
Alan Dewar KC – Ampersand Advocates ‘A silk who is extremely knowledgeable, concise and certainly has the ear of the court.’
Robert Howie KC – Ampersand Advocates ‘Robert is able to identify core issues in highly complex litigation quickly and with razor sharp focus, and provides practical advice on and solutions to those issues. His analytical skills are first-rate.’
Leading juniors
Band 1
Ross Anderson – Ampersand Advocates ‘Ross is a good communicator and a first-rate advocate who is quick on his feet. He provides sound and detailed advice.’
Eoghainn MacLean – Ampersand Advocates ‘He thoroughly considers the issues in a case.’
Usman Tariq – Ampersand Advocates ‘He is assiduous and tremendously user-friendly. Judges like his understated approach in court.’
Band 2
Mark Boni – Ampersand Advocates ‘Mark is extremely professional in his approach. He has a good manner with clients and provides clear and concise advice on difficult legal issues.’
Paul Reid – Ampersand Advocates ‘Paul understands the pressures solicitors and clients are under and is incredibly easy to work with. He is across every detail, and can be relied upon to explain complex issues in simple language.’
Timothy Young – Ampersand Advocates ‘Timothy is extremely commercial, and takes time to understand the client’s objectives and the wider context of the dispute. He is excellent under pressure and he is extremely robust. His written work is clear and persuasive, and he is equally impressive on his feet.’
Rising Star
Michael Way – Ampersand Advocates ‘Michael is very knowledgeable, and builds a strong rapport with solicitors and clients alike.’
Personal Injury and Medical Negligence
TIER 1
Ampersand Advocates garners particular praise for its ‘unique depth and range of expertise in clinical negligence‘; complex, high-value personal injury work is another core pillar of strength for the team. Maria Maguire KC has solid expertise in advising on cases involving psychiatric injuries and catastrophic injury matters. Lauren Sutherland KC, who is also a member of Byrom Street Chambers in Manchester, is well known for handling cerebral palsy and brain injury cases, and has niche expertise in advising on issues of consent in relation to clinical negligence matters. Among the juniors, Jennifer Nicholson-White is active in both areas, and represents pursuers and defenders in a range of litigation.
Testimonials
Stable
‘Very high calibre of advocates.’
‘The stable has a wealth of experience.’
Leading silks
Band 1
David Stephenson KC – Ampersand Advocates ‘David is a brilliant and skilled orator, who is highly effective on his feet in court. He is a very safe pair of hands in complex, high value clinical negligence cases.’
Euan Mackenzie KC – Ampersand Advocates ‘Euan is an excellent advocate, with a mild demeanour that belies a steely core.’
Geoffrey Mitchell KC – Ampersand Advocates ‘He is a skilled and practical negotiator. A silk with a calm presence in court, unfailingly polite but rigorous in questioning.’
Graham Primrose KC – Ampersand Advocates ‘Graham is simply outstanding in his field. A stalwart negotiator and a quality operator at the top of his game.’
Lisa Henderson KC – Ampersand Advocates ‘Lisa is excellent with clients, and they are well aware of her dedication to the case. She is thorough in her preparation.’
Maria Maguire KC -Ampersand Advocates ‘Maria is a class act. She is top of her game in this field. She is a master at analysing complex cases and providing clear and straightforward advice to clients.’
Simon Bowie KC -Ampersand Advocates ‘Simon is an exceptional silk who is always thorough in his preparation, calm in his approach and extremely personable. He is clever, thoughtful and level headed.’
Band 2
Lauren Sutherland KC – Ampersand Advocates ‘Lauren is fearless, tenacious and has meticulous attention to detail. She also easily builds rapport with clients and gains their trust. She has an unparalleled knowledge of relevant cases, however obscure.’
Alan Dewar KC – Ampersand Advocates
Douglas Ross KC – Ampersand Advocates ‘He is always well-prepared and goes the extra mile. A very calm and measured advocate with a very understated manner, and always treats others with respect.’
Una Doherty KC – Ampersand Advocates ‘Una is incredibly calm and instils confidence She is determined and dependable, and has the ability to cut straight through the superfluous and immediately identify the issues at the heart of an action.’
Vinit Khurana KC – Ampersand Advocates
Leading juniors
Band 1
James McConnell – Ampersand Advocates ‘A well respected junior. He is organised, extremely thorough and diligent. Excellent with clients and experts.’
Band 2
Fiona Drysdale – Ampersand Advocates ‘A diligent, perceptive and highly able junior.’
Jennifer Nicholson-White –Ampersand Advocates ‘She offers clear and focussed advice to clients and presents cases well in court. She is very personable, making her extremely easy to work with, yet is prepared to stick to her guns where appropriate and goes above and beyond for all clients.’
Shane Dundas – Ampersand Advocates ‘An outstanding advocate who is great to work with. He is responsive, proactive and excellent in court.’
Property, Planning and Construction
TIER 1
Ampersand Advocates ‘has a wide offering of quality advocates‘ and an excellent reputation for its expertise in planning and construction law matters. Laura-Anne Van Der Westhuizen KC is ‘a very impressive advocate‘ who provides ‘clear, considered and strategic advice‘ across a wide range of planning matters. Marcus McKay KC is viewed as ‘one of the best at the senior Bar in planning and environmental matters‘. Timothy Young is sought after for his solid track record in advising on construction contractual disputes and contentious property work, including crofting and agricultural issues. Nicholas McAndrew is ‘a first class junior, particularly when it comes to construction and engineering disputes‘.
Testimonials
Stable
‘Ampersand is very responsive and easy to work with.’
‘Ampersand is a strong stable with a fantastic choice of advocates.’
Leading silks
Band 1
Robert Howie KC – Ampersand Advocates ‘A superbly analytical and utterly top drawer silk who is excellent in court.’
Marcus McKay KC – Ampersand Advocates ‘Marcus is a very pragmatic silk, and he is extremely easy to work with. He presents cases in a clear and logical manner and is good at seeing the bigger picture.’
Malcolm Thomson KC – Ampersand Advocates ‘He is an exceptional advocate.’
Ailsa Wilson KC – Ampersand Advocates ‘A silk with a very strong planning law practice.’
Leading juniors
Band 1
Eoghainn MacLean – Ampersand Advocates
Timothy Young – Ampersand Advocates ‘He is a fierce advocate who you want on your side in a contentious matter.‘
Band 2
Nicholas McAndrew – Ampersand Advocates ‘An incredibly able junior with a very calm, measured and methodical way of approaching cases. He is conscientious, and clear and concise in his advocacy.’
Ross Anderson – Ampersand Advocates ‘He is an impressive court performer and provides solid commercial advice.’
Giles Reid – Ampersand Advocates ‘Giles has an exceptional knowledge of Scottish property law. He is diligent, attentive and very user-friendly.’
Employment
Aidan O’Neill KC – Ampersand Advocates ‘He is an excellent communicator and exceedingly bright. He is also wonderfully adept under pressure.’
Full listings, including all Scottish rankings can be viewed on the Legal 500 website here.
Back
Scott Clair
Since calling to the Bar as a Lord Hope Scholar in 2022, Scott Clair has built a strong practice anchored around professional liability, commercial litigation and public law. In 2024, he was appointed as Standing Junior Counsel to the Advocate General for Scotland (UK Government). In that capacity, he has advised and represented the UK Government in respect of a broad range of matters, ranging from a judicial review in relation to immigration law, to director’s disqualification proceedings.
Scott also has particular interest and experience in professional liability and regulation (especially claims against solicitors, advocates and healthcare professionals). As well as conducting litigation on behalf of professionals, he has appeared before fitness to practice panels. Scott is regularly instructed by the NHS in Scotland to advise on a wide range of matters, including clinical negligence claims, fatal accident inquiries and advice in relation to statutory and regulatory compliance. He has also carried out work as an ad hoc junior counsel to the Scottish Hospitals Inquiry. Although predominantly instructed on behalf of defenders, Scott also has experience of pursuing claims on behalf of pursuers (professional liability, commercial and property litigation). He regularly appears in the Court of Session and other courts and tribunals. He has appeared in several appeals and has appeared a number of times as sole counsel before the Inner House of the Court of Session.
Scott has tutored in a range of subjects, including public law, delict, commercial law, and evidence at the University of Edinburgh. He continues to retain an interest in legal education, as an accredited instructor for the Faculty of Advocates’ training for devils programme.
Scott is also a reporter for Session Cases, the most authoritative law reports in Scotland. He is also a member of the Faculty of Advocates’ Law Reform Committee and in that capacity has assisted with the preparation of consultation responses to the Scottish Government on behalf of the Faculty.
Back
Ayla Iridag
Ayla Iridag called to the bar after working as a solicitor for an International Law Firm, predominately in the fields of insurance and public law. Ayla specialises in actions arising from Health and Safety and Administrative Law matters. This includes personal injury and clinical negligence actions in both the Sheriff Court and Court of Session, as well as Fatal Accident Inquiries and Judicial Reviews.
Ayla’s public and administrative law practice is broad and examples of recent work include firearms licensing disputes, malicious prosecution and unlawful detention cases and orders under the Sexual Offences Act 2003. Ayla has appeared in the Mental Health Tribunal. Ayla was appointed Standing Junior to the Office of the Advocate General in 2022 and in this role has been instructed by various government departments in actions under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, petitions for Judicial Review and appeals against Health and Safety Prohibition Notices.
Ayla’s Health and Safety practice includes acting for insurers and commercial organisations in defending actions arising from workplace accidents; occupiers’ liability claims and road traffic accidents. Ayla is regularly instructed on behalf of health boards and medical organisations in respect of clinical negligence matters, often with a particular interest in mental health, as well as in Fatal Accident Inquiries across Scotland. Prior to calling to the bar, as a Solicitor and Devil, Ayla gained experience in health and safety prosecutions, including at trial. She has experience appearing in the criminal courts, including conducting commissions.
Ayla also has experience of regulatory proceedings, having conducted substantive hearings for the Nursing and Midwifery Council and Scottish Social Services Council.
Selected cases
Back
Katharine Muir
Katharine Muir called to the Bar in 2022 after 6 years as a solicitor in private practice. She is currently on maternity leave. She has a varied civil practice which includes professional regulation, clinical negligence, product liability, judicial review, defamation, construction litigation and contractual disputes. She appears regularly in the Sheriff Courts and Court of Session and has been instructed in group proceedings.
Katharine has a particular interest in product liability. She has worked on some of the most high-profile product liability cases in Scotland as solicitor and since coming to the Bar. She has also advised manufacturers on product compliance and safety, labelling and advertising.
Katharine tutors on the Commercial Law course at the University of Strathclyde.
Back
Judicial Review on Scottish census sex question refused
A judicial review Petition by Fair Play for Women Limited challenging the Scottish Census guidance to allow people to identify as male or female regardless of what is on their birth certificate has been refused at first instance and now on Appeal
Lord Sandison’s Opinion of 17th February 2022 said an answer given in “good faith and on reasonable grounds” should not be seen as false. Lady Dorrian, the Lord Justice Clerk, delivered the Inner House Opinion, published on 24th February 2022, endorsed all the reasoning of the Lord Ordinary.
News coverage from the BBC can be found here. Lord Sandison’s Opinion can be found here. The Inner House Opinion can be found here.
Ampersand’s Douglas Ross QC and Paul Reid, acted for the Scottish Government.
Back
Craig (Appellant) v Her Majesty’s Advocate (for the Government of the United States of America) and another (Respondents) (Scotland) [2022] UKSC 6
The UK Supreme Court has unanimously allowed the appeal of James Craig, a British citizen living in Scotland. In May 2017, the US Government made a request for his extradition to the US, where he is accused of committing an offence relating to securities fraud.
The process for determining whether a person should be extradited from the UK is governed by the Extradition Act 2003 (“the 2003 Act“). By the Crime and Courts Act 2013 (“the 2013 Act“), Parliament inserted into the 2003 Act a number of provisions referred to as “the forum bar provisions”. These provisions aim to prevent extradition where the offences could be fairly and effectively tried in the UK, and it is not in the interests of justice that the requested person should be extradited. Section 61 of the 2013 Act provides that the forum bar provisions will “come into force on such a day as the Secretary of State may by order appoint”. The Secretary of State brought the forum bar provisions into force in England, Wales and Northern Ireland in October 2013, but he did not bring them into force in Scotland.
Mr Craig wanted to rely on the forum bar provisions in the extradition proceedings brought against him in Scotland. He therefore issued a claim against the Advocate General for Scotland and the Scottish Ministers, arguing that the Secretary of State’s failure to bring the forum bar provisions into force in Scotland was unlawful. In December 2018, the Outer House of the Court of Session found in Mr Craig’s favour and made an order in which it “declared… that in its continuing failure to bring into force in Scotland the extradition forum bar provisions… the UK Government is acting unlawfully and contrary to its duties under section 61 of [the 2013 Act]”.
Notwithstanding that order, the UK Government failed to bring the forum bar provisions into force in Scotland until September 2021. In the meantime, the Lord Advocate continued to pursue extradition proceedings against Mr Craig. In July 2019, a sheriff decided that there was no bar to Mr Craig’s extradition under the 2003 Act and that his extradition would be compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights (“the Convention“). The sheriff sent the matter on to the Scottish Ministers, who in September 2019 decided that Mr Craig should be extradited to the US.
Mr Craig appealed, unsuccessfully, to the High Court of Justiciary. He appealed to the UK Supreme Court.
Lord Reed’s sole judgment, with which the other Justices agree, said:
Section 57(2) of the Scotland Act 1998 provides that a “member of the Scottish Government has no power to… act, so far as the… act is incompatible with any of the Convention rights” [25]. This means that the Lord Advocate has no power to conduct extradition proceedings against Mr Craig, and the Scottish Ministers have no power to order his extradition, if those acts are incompatible with Mr Craig’s rights under the Convention [37], [47].
There is no dispute that the extradition of Mr Craig would interfere with his right to respect for his private and family life, as guaranteed by article 8(1) of the Convention. Such an interference could, however, be justified under article 8(2), if it is “in accordance with the law”, if it pursues a “legitimate aim”, and if it is “necessary in a democratic society”. To satisfy the first of those three requirements, the interference must be in conformity with domestic law and the domestic law must meet the requirements of the rule of law, so as to afford adequate legal protection against arbitrariness. This is an absolute requirement. The executive is afforded no margin of discretion in meeting it [48]-[50].
The interference with Mr Craig’s rights under article 8(1) was not “in accordance with the law”, within the meaning of article 8(2) [52]. The order made by the Outer House in December 2018 was expressed in the present tense, making clear that the Secretary of State was “continuing” to act in breach of section 61 of the 2013 Act by failing to bring the forum bar provisions into force. The Secretary of State had a duty to act in conformity with that order, and his failure to do so was unlawful [41]-[42]. The extradition procedure followed in Mr Craig’s case did not therefore accord with section 61 of the 2013 Act [52].
It is no answer to this that the order made by the Outer House was merely declaratory, rather than coercive [43]. It is firmly established that there is a clear expectation that the Government will comply with declaratory orders, and it is in reliance on that expectation that the courts usually refrain from making coercive orders against the Government and grant declaratory orders instead [44]. This is one of the core principles of our constitution. It is vital to the mutual trust which underpins the relationship between the Government and the courts [46].
Accordingly, the extradition proceedings against Mr Craig were not conducted “in accordance with the law” and so were incompatible with his rights under article 8 of the Convention. It follows that the extradition order made against him is invalid [53].
References in square brackets are to paragraphs in the judgment
A new extradition hearing may be held before a different sheriff, at which Mr Craig will be able to rely on the forum bar provisions (in addition to any other arguments properly available to him).
Ampersand’s Aidan O’Neill QC, leading Fred Mackintosh QC, instructed by Dunne Defence, represented the appellant.
The judgment of the UK can be found here.
Back
