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
The ayes have it in ‘fascinating’ rape debate
An engaged audience at a special Faculty/Rape Crisis Scotland event heard informed analysis of the issues surrounding independent legal representation for complainers in rape trials.
Four insightful submissions were made by expert speakers as they debated a motion that complainers should have their own lawyer in court.
One contribution from the floor hailed the discussion as “fascinating”, and the Dean of Faculty, Gordon Jackson, QC, said it had been a pleasure to host the event and to work with Rape Crisis Scotland in arranging it.
“This is a very important issue, and to hear and explore different points of view is always very worthwhile,” added Mr Jackson.
“Sometimes events like this generate more heat than light, but that was certainly not the case here.”
Sandy Brindley, of Rape Crisis Scotland, commented: “It was great to see so much interest in this debate and the range of people who attended. We enjoyed a constructive discussion about possible ways forward in the prosecution of rape and sexual offences.”
The motion was: “This house believes that prosecution in the public interest cannot deliver justice to rape complainers unless they have independent representation.”
Speaking in favour were Ampersand’s Simon Di Rollo, QC, and Professor Peter Duff, of Aberdeen University Law School, who said the independent prosecutor acting in the public interest could not look after the interests of the complainer when those respective interests sometimes were in conflict. Complainers needed someone to support them, who was able to explain and take them through the intricate legal process, not just hold their hand.
Most other jurisdictions in the civilised world required independent representation, it was said. Few countries made no provision but that was essentially where Scotland was at the moment.
Murdo Macleod, QC, and Clare Connelly, Advocate, presented views against the motion. They argued that the criminal justice system was evolving rapidly in a number of ways to ease the experience of complainers, and time was needed to consider how those steps had bedded in.
It was often highlighted that the conviction rate was higher in rape cases in England, but the reason could have nothing to do with independent representation because there were no complainers’ lawyers there either.
Another point made against the motion was the cost, bearing in mind that the legal aid budget was already stretched.
Having heard both sides, the audience was asked to decide, and by a sizeable majority, it voted in favour of the motion.
Back
Faculty of Advocates Debate: Rape complainers should be represented in court
Faculty of Advocates in association with Rape Crisis Scotland
The Faculty and Rape Crisis Scotland are hosting a debate at 6pm on Wednesday, 28 November.
The motion will be “this house believes that prosecution in the public interest cannot deliver justice to rape complainers unless they have independent representation”. The debate will be hosted by the Gordon Jackson QC, Dean of Faculty. Ampersand’s Simon di Rollo QC and Professor Peter Duff, Aberdeen University Law School will speak in favour of the motion; Murdo Macleod QC and Clare Connelly, Advocate, will speak against the motion. The event will attract 1 hour of substantive law CPD.
Tickets are free and can be booked via Eventbrite here.
Back
FOA & Royal College of Physicians event – Doctors, Lawyers and Wolves: Till death do us part
Faculty of Advocates and Royal College of Physicians event
The Faculty of Advocates is teaming up again with the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh in a second medico-legal debate, examining assisted suicide.
In the first collaboration earlier this year, the spotlight fell on the implications and lessons of the Bawa-Garba case, in which a doctor was convicted of the manslaughter of a six-year-old boy by gross negligence and given a two-year suspended jail sentence.
The next event in the Doctors, Lawyers and Wolves series will see Ampersand’s David Stephenson QC, a specialist in medical law, joining a panel of medical experts to discuss, “Till Death Do Us Part”. Issues to be raised include legal aspects of end-of-life care and whether the law needs to be changed to permit physician assisted suicide.
Mr Stephenson said: “Assisted suicide is an issue that will not go away, despite failed attempts to legislate in both Scotland and England. The position in Scotland is unsatisfactory in light of the Inner House decision in Ross v Lord Advocate 2016 SC 502. The case suggests assistance will not in some circumstances be criminal in Scotland. If so, then the limits of legality and the regulation of practice in the interests of affected individuals and the wider public is a matter of acute concern.”
The event is on Wednesday, 12 September, from 6pm at the RCPE’s Great Hall in Queen Street, Edinburgh
See the Royal College of Physician’s website for full details and how to book here.
Back
The Limitation (Childhood Abuse) (Scotland) Act 2017
Conference organised by the Law Society of Scotland with leading experts exploring the new 2017 Act, including Simon Di Rollo QC talking on “Where civil and criminal proceedings interact: Criminal allegations where there has been no prosecution”.
Full details on the Law Society of Scotland’s website here.
Back
Kathryn Ferguson
Kathryn Ferguson joined Ampersand in 2018 and has completed Paralegal qualifications in both Conveyancing and Wills and Executries. Prior to joining the team Kathryn worked for a global law firm supporting the Commercial Real Estate and Litigation teams.
Kathryn brings a can-do approach and is always willing to assist in all aspects of instructing counsel.
Back
