Top Rankings success in latest Chambers and Partners UK Bar Guide
Ampersand has again received top tier rankings across a number of areas of practice in the latest published guide to the legal profession, Chambers and Partners UK Bar Guide 2019.
Ampersand received 56 listings across 17 areas of practice, ranking as top tier (band 1) in Clinical Negligence as a Set, and band 2 in Administrative & Public law, Civil Liberties & Human Rights, Commercial Dispute Resolution, Planning & Environment, Personal Injury, Product Liability and Restructuring/Insolvency as a Set. 4 members are noted as “star individuals”.
Noted as a Band 1 set for Clinical Negligence, Ampersand has 16 rankings in this area. The guide says “Ampersand enjoys an excellent reputation in the field of Scottish clinical negligence litigation. It houses a large number of advocates who specialise in the pursuit and defence of clinical negligence cases, including both QCs and juniors. Matters commonly dealt with include brain and spinal injury claims as well as fatal accident inquiries. Members are skilled at handling high-profile group actions, such as the recent suits regarding vaginal mesh implants. Sources highlight the stable’s impressive offering in the area and the “great strength and depth” of its advocates.” The listing includes Maria Maguire QC as a “Star Individual”.
Band 2 listings include Administrative and Public law where Ampersand’s frequent level public law challenges across a wide range of practice areas noted. In Civil Liberties & Human Rights the Band 2 listing notes Ampersand as a “dynamic group of public law and human rights advocates” and that “Ampersand Advocates is particularly well known for advising on the ECHR and the intersection between UK and EU law.”
In Commercial Dispute Resolution it states “Ampersand Advocates offers a strong bench of versatile and well-regarded commercial dispute resolution practitioners. The stable houses a number of silks and juniors experienced in general commercial litigation, with proficiency in disputes concerning insolvency, professional negligence and construction in particular. Advocates are also noted for their abilities in contentious matters involving planning, commercial contracts and intellectual property, often representing large companies and financial institutions”. Ampersand’s Commercial expertise is further noted in Restructuring and Insolvency, which includes “Star Individual” David Sellar QC, stating Ampersand “Home to leading silks for restructuring and insolvency in Scotland. They are regularly instructed by insolvency administrators, directors and shareholders in a variety of matters ranging from the interaction of insolvency law with public regulatory schemes to allegations of wrongful trading. The advocates have good expertise in relation to jurisdictional matters.”
Ampersand’s Personal Injury work is again acknowledged with the guide noting “A well-reputed personal injury stable on the Scottish Circuit, noted for its expert handling of complex catastrophic injury and fatal claims on behalf of both pursuers and defenders. It is regularly instructed by several leading Scottish law firms, as well as major insurers and government agencies.” It also notes that our “members also have experience appearing before fatal accident inquiries, representing health boards, doctors and hospitals, as well as bereaved families and individuals. Ampersand’s advocates are regularly involved in high-value and complex personal injury claims, and have litigated cases in the Sheriff Courts, the Court of Session and the Supreme Court.” The listing includes Maria Maguire QC and Graham Primrose QC as “Star Individuals”.
In Planning and Environment it states “Ampersand Advocates includes a number of advocates who specialise in planning and environmental law. It excels in handling judicial reviews and planning challenges, and has substantive expertise in the communications, transport and energy sectors. Its clients include local councils, conservation bodies and developers.” This includes “Star Individual” Malcolm Thomson QC. Ampersand is also a Band 2 set in Product Liability stating “A prominent player in product liability matters, with additional bench strength in the areas of personal injury and professional liability. Members routinely act in cases involving defective medical devices and claims relating to industrial product liability. They are experienced in the representation of defenders and pursuers, both in individual cases and in group actions.”
The Clerks also receive high praise again stating “the clerking is excellent” noting “the clerking team is very responsive and experienced. The quality shines through.” and “team is very accommodating and helpful. The clerks respond to enquiries timeously”.
Ampersand’s full listings can be viewed on the Chambers and Partners website here.
Back
“Ampersand’s advocates attract praise for their ‘excellent depth and breadth of knowledge’” – in latest Legal 500 UK Bar listings
Ampersand is delighted to be once again be recommended as a top-tier set by The Legal 500 UK Bar Directory in their latest listings for 2018 published today.
The guide says “Ampersand’s advocates attract praise for their ‘excellent depth and breadth of knowledge’ across a range of areas, particularly in the field of personal injury and clinical negligence. Practitioners also have expertise in planning, commercial, property and regulatory law. The ‘very user-friendly’ and ‘proactive’ Alan Moffat (‘when there are challenges he finds a solution’) leads the ‘efficient, friendly and helpful’ clerking team.”
Ampersand has 34 listings across 8 areas of practice in the Legal 500 UK 2018 guide.
Civil liberties, human rights, public inquiries, and public and administrative law (including local government)
Practitioners at Ampersand report an uptick in cases involving human rights matters, alongside public inquiry work and EU law cases. Members of the stable continue to act in the long-running Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry.
Aidan O’Neill QC – ‘Immensely intelligent and tremendous on his feet.’
Dorothy Bain QC – ‘Her practice covers the purview of civil and public law matters.’
Douglas Ross QC – ‘Intellectual, analytical, perceptive and thorough.’
Laura-Anne van der Westhuizen – ‘She is diligent and industrious.’
Commercial litigation
Ampersand’s practitioners are instructed across a broad spectrum of commercial disputes. Recent case highlights include up-and-coming junior Giles Reid appearing in the Court of Session in a matter relating to the enforcement of a judgment made in a Belgian court; the Court of Session found the enforcement of a demand for payment could not take place due to a lacunae in the law.
Alan Dewar QC – ‘Highly experienced across a range of commercial disputes.’
Craig Sandison QC – ‘A brilliant commercial silk.’
Robert Howie QC – ‘Exceptionally persuasive on his feet.’
Eoghainn MacLean – ‘Enthusiastic and conscientious.’
Giles Reid – ‘He has remarkable oral advocacy skills.’
Usman Tariq – ‘Very good on his feet.’
Company and insolvency
Ampersand’s advocates are instructed across a range of liquidation and insolvency matters, including director disqualifications, shareholder disputes and asset recovery matters.
David Sellar QC – ‘His knowledge of insolvency law is outstanding.’
Employment
Ampersand’s recent caseload includes unfair dismissal cases, TUPE and discrimination matters.
Russell Bradley – ‘He is proactive, commercial and precise.’
Intellectual property, information technology and media
In 2017, Usman Tariq at Ampersand successfully represented the respondents in CCHG Ltd (t/a Vaporized) v Vapouriz, an appeal resulting from a dispute between two prominent UK e-cigarette retailers over their respective trade marks; this case marked the first time the Court of Session heard an appeal from the UK Intellectual Property Office under the Trade Marks Act 1994.
Craig Sandison QC – ‘His practice includes trade mark disputes and defamation matters.’
Usman Tariq – ‘He has the ear of the court.’
Personal injury and medical negligence
Ampersand has ‘excellent depth and breadth of knowledge’ across the medical negligence and personal injury fields, with members handling a broad range of matters including birth injuries, brain and spinal injuries, cerebral palsy claims, as well as fatal and catastrophic injuries.
David Stephenson QC – ‘Very well known for representing NHS bodies in clinical malpractice matters.’
Douglas Ross QC – ‘He has encyclopaedic legal knowledge.’
Euan Mackenzie QC – ‘Highly methodical and brilliant in court.’
Graham Primrose QC – ‘Very experienced in personal injury reparation cases.’
Lisa Henderson QC – ‘She is extremely hardworking, with extensive experience in high-value personal injury cases.’
Lauren Sutherland QC – ‘She is a very conscientious and personable silk.’
Maria Maguire QC – ‘A formidable advocate who commands respect.’
Simon Di Rollo QC – ‘An expert on clinical negligence matters.’
Archie MacSporran – ‘Recommended for cerebral palsy and brain injury cases.’
Brian Fitzpatrick – ‘A tenacious negotiator.’
Christian Marney – ‘Robust and intellectual.’
Fiona Drysdale – ‘Recommended for catastrophic injury cases arising from road traffic accidents and medical negligence.’
James Dawson – ‘He has a very analytical eye.’
Una Doherty – ‘A high-calibre advocate.’
Planning, environmental and licensing
Members of Ampersand have solid experience in planning and environmental law matters. Energy and infrastructure projects form core areas of instruction for the team, with recent cases pertaining to challenges to wind farm and power line developments.
Ailsa Wilson QC – ‘A resourceful and determined advocate.’
Malcolm Thomson QC – ‘He commands the respect of the bench.’
Marcus McKay QC – ‘He is very experienced in renewable energy matters.’
Laura-Anne van der Westhuizen – ‘A safe pair of hands.’
Property, construction and agriculture
Practitioners at Ampersand have expertise in contractual matters as well as landlord and tenant disputes, among other areas.
Robert Howie QC – ‘He holds the ear of the judiciary.’
Eoghainn MacLean – ‘A very meticulous advocate.’
Full listings can be viewed here.
Back
Landmark case for Trade Union Law Firm and Ampersand’s Dorothy Bain Q.C.
On 8th February 2018 Ampersand Advocates Dorothy Bain Q.C. appeared at Dundee Sheriff Court for Unionline Scotland, winning a landmark case on behalf of a care worker for the rescission of a temporary suspension order imposed on him. The full article from the Scottish Legal News can be found 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
UKSC dismisses Secretary of State’s appeal on whether employees of embassies could have the provisions of the State Immunity Act 1978 disapplied to allow bringing EU law based employment claims before Employment Tribunal
Benkharbouche v Secretary of State for Foreign & Commonwealth Affairs; Libya v Janah [2017] UKSC 62
The UK Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the Secretary of State’s appeal and affirmed the order of the Court of Appeal in a judgment handed down today.
The case concerned the Convention compatibility, and separately the EU law compatibility of the granting of immunity from suit to foreign embassies (under the provisions of the State Immunity Act 1978) against all and any claims brought against them before the Employment Tribunal by former employees. The Court held that in order to provide an effective remedy to the employees against their former employers as required by Article 47 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights the relevant provisions of the State Immunity Act 1978 had to be disapplied, but only in relation to such of their claims which fell within the ambit of EU law (claims for discrimination, harassment and breach of the Working Time Regulations). These were remitted to proceed before the Employment Tribunal and be determined on their merits. But in respect of those claims which were based solely on national law without an EU law underpinning (failure to provide payslips or a contract of employment, unpaid wages, failure to pay the national minimum wage and unfair dismissal) the employees continued to be barred from running them by 4(2)(b) and 16(1)(a) of the State Immunity Act 1978, notwithstanding that the Court found that their exclusion from the employment tribunal in respect of these claims was Convention incompatible (both under reference to Article 6 ECHR on its own and Article 6 ECHR read with Article 14 ECHR), and made a declaration to this effect under Section 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998.
The high doctrine of Parliamentary sovereignty proclaimed in Miller means that without an EU law element the claimants in Benkharbouche had no effective remedy. And Clause 5(4) provides bluntly that “The Charter of Fundamental Rights is not part of domestic law on or after exit day” a provision softened only by the immediately succeeding terms of Clause 5(5) which provide that:
“(5) Subsection (4) does not affect the retention in domestic law on or after exit day in accordance with this Act of any fundamental rights or principles which exist irrespective of the Charter (and references to the Charter in any case law are, so far as necessary for this purpose, to be read as if they were references to any corresponding retained fundamental rights or principles).”
This case follows from the companion case of UNISON where the imposition of fees by the executive re access to employment tribunals was struck down as unlawful and in breach of the common law constitutional right of access to the court, highlighting the EU law effective remedy.
Ampersand’s Aidan O’Neill QC acted for the intervener, the AIRE centre.
Full judgment here, press summary here and link to watch the hearing here.
Back
Benkharbouche v Secretary of State for Foreign & Commonwealth Affairs; Libya v Janah [2017] UKSC 62
On appeal from [2015] EWCA Civ 33
These cases considered whether granting immunity from suit under the State Immunity Act 1978 engages, and breaches, the Respondents’ rights under the ECHR and EU Charter. The claimants issued various claims in the employment tribunal following their dismissal from positions within the London Embassy, working for Sudan and Libya, which both claimed immunity from suit.
The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the Secretary of State’s appeal and affirmed the order of the Court of Appeal. The State Immunity Act 1978, s 4(2)(b) and 16(1)(a) would not apply to the claims derived from EU law discrimination, harassment and breach of the Working Time Regulations. Under the State Immunity Act 1978, s 4(2)(b), a person’s nationality and residence at the date of the employment contract were not deemed proper grounds for denying a person access to the courts in respect of their employment in this country. Similarly, the Court rejected the argument that absolute immunity applied in relation to the employment of embassy staff under the State Immunity Act 1978, s 16(1)(a) and under customary international law. Both s 4(2)(b) and 16(1)(a) of the 1978 Act which confer immunity in English law were held to be incompatible with the ECHR, art 6 and also the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. EU law prevails over English law in the event of conflict and thus both cases were to be remitted to the Employment Tribunal to determine the claims based on EU law on their merits. The Court rejected the Secretary of State’s arguments based on state immunity and held that whilst there was a long-standing consensus of states in favour of immunity, there had never been sufficient international consensus for an absolute rule in customary international law. A Court could identify a rule of customary international law only if enough states follow a consistent practice, on the footing that it is a legal obligation.
For judgment, please download: [2017] UKSC 62
For Court’s press summary, please download: Court’s Press Summary
To watch the hearing, please visit: Supreme Court Website (6 Jun 2017 afternoon session)
(7 Jun 2017 morning session) (7 Jun 2017 afternoon session) (8 Jun 2017 morning session)
Back
