Education & Professional Qualifications

LLB, (Jt. Hons) in Public Law & Politics (1990) Postgraduate Diploma in Legal Practice (1991), at University of Glasgow (1986-1991)
Shaw Stewart Memorial Prize (1988)
Balfour Prize for Mercantile Law (1988)

Courts & Tribunal Experience

The Judicial Committee of the House of Lords; The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom; The Inner & Outer Houses of the Court of Session; The High Court of Justiciary; The Sheriff Court; Fatal Accident Inquiries (Sheriff Court); Merchant Shipping Inquiries; The Employment Appeal Tribunal; Employment Tribunals; The Transport Tribunal; Planning Inquiries; Social Security Commissioners Hearings; The Traffic Commissioner; The Asylum & Immigration Tribunal; The NHS Tribunal; The Competition Appeal Tribunal (London); Planning Inquiries; Social Security Commissioners Hearings.

Selected Commercial Cases

Dunfermline B.S. v FM Front Door Ltd [2011] CSOH 175; 2011 G.W.D. 37-753
This Opinion of Lord Hodge provides guidance on when the terms of a written contract can be varied by the actings of the parties and on the application of the principles of personal bar in such circumstances. Lord Hodge also clarified when it would be appropriate for the court to grant an administration order.

Johnson & Smart (Projects) Ltd v Sinclair [2011] CSOH 166; 2011 G.W.D. 33-699
This Opinion of Lord Malcolm considers when the five year prescriptive period commences in contracts for the supply of services. In particular, Lord Malcolm considers when it necessary for an invoice to have been rendered before the prescriptive period can commence.

Wilmington Trust Co v Rolls Royce Plc [2011] CSOH 151; 2011 G.W.D. 32-681
In this Commercial Action Lord Hodge reviews the authorities relating to the creation of liens and provides a modern statement of what conditions required to be fulfilled before a lien can be created. Issues of international private law also arose as the contracts in question were subject to the Law of the State of New York.

Dryburgh v Scotts Media Tax Limited [2011] CSOH 147; 2011 G.W.D. 31-658
In this Commercial Action Lord Glennie considered the content and scope of the fiduciary duties and common law duties of care that are incumbent upon a company director when implementing tax avoidance schemes. Lord Glennie also considered the issues of common law fraud on creditors and whether or not all breaches of trust were imprescriptible.

Pocock's Trustee v Skene Investments (Aberdeen) Ltd 2011 G.W.D. 30-654
This action concerned attempts by a Trustee in Sequestration to reduce certain fraudulent conveyancing transaction which had been entered into by a fraudulent property developer. The main issue was what rights a bona fide third party in possession had in these particular circumstances. Issues of personal bar and mora, taciturnity and acquiescence were also raised.

Crieff Highland Gathering Ltd v Perth and Kinross Council 2011 S.L.T. 992
This action concerned a tenant’s liability for extraordinary repairs. Lord Pentland considered whether the tenants were in breach of their obligations relating to extraordinary repairs and whether any such breaches were of sufficient materiality to entitle the landlord to terminate the lease.

Mitchell v Hiscox Underwriting Ltd 2010 G.W.D. 13-244
In this appeal the Extra Division considered the circumstances in which an insurer could avoid a policy if a material misrepresentation by the assured had induced it to enter into the policy on different terms than would otherwise have been offered.

Commonwealth Oil & Gas Ltd v Baxter 2010 SC 156
This Opinion of the First Division is the leading Scottish authority on the nature and content of directors' fiduciary duties. In particular, the First Division gave guidance on the fiduciary duties owed by a non-executive director who had directorships with competing companies.

McLeod v Rooney 2010 S.L.T. 499
This Opinion of Lord Glennie is a Scottish authority on what requires to be averred and proved in order to rely on the economic delict of causing loss by unlawful means. Lord Glennie also provided guidance on the application of the rule against suing for reflective loss.

Bank of Ireland v Morton 2003 SC 257
In this appeal the First Division considered what duties were owed by a creditor to a company director who had provided a personal guarantee for the company’s debts. In particular, the First Division held that the existence of a duty on the creditor to advise the guarantor that a first ranking had not been obtained was not supported by the law of cautionry and the existence of such a duty was inconsistent with the terms and conditions set out in the guarantee.

Selected Competition & Public Procurement Cases

Clinical Solutions International Ltd v NHS 24 & Capgemini Plc [2012] CSOH 10
This Opinion of Lord Hodge provides further guidance on the test to be applied in relation to Regulation 47(10) applications and highlights the requirement, under Regulation 47(6) of the 2006 Regulations, for a disappointed tenderer to notify the contracting authority of its intention to bring proceedings prior to commencement of the litigation.

Lightways (Contractors) Ltd v North Ayrshire Council 2008 SLT 690
This Opinion of Lord Bracadale considered the circumstances in which a disappointed tenderer could obtain an interim interdict preventing a public authority from awarding a public contract to a competitor under and in terms of The Public Contracts (Scotland) Regulations 2006.

Selected Professional Liability & Disciplinary Cases

Kidd v Scottish Legal Complaints Commission [2011] CSIH 75; 2012 G.W.D. 1-5
This Opinion of the First Division provides guidance on the content and scope of the duty to give reasons by disciplinary bodies such as the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission.

Shetland Health Board v Kelly [2011] CSOH 67; 2011 G.W.D. 15-357
In this Ordinary Action Temporary Judge Reid considered, inter alia, when claims for repayment of monies under the National Health Service (Optical Charges and Payments) (Scotland) Regulations 1989 and 1998 and under common law fraud prescribed.

Sheldon v Nursing & Midwifery Council 2010 S.L.T. 1195
In this appeal from the Conduct and Competence Committee of the Nursing and Midwifery Council the Second Division considered the adequacy of the reasons provided by the Committee and examined the significance of the Indicative Sanctions Guidance when assessing what sanction should be imposed.

Graham v Nursing and Midwifery Council 2008 SC 659
In this appeal from the Conduct and Competence Committee of the Nursing and Midwifery Council the Extra Division held that the sanction imposed had been excessive and disproportionate because the Committee had failed to take into account certain relevant and material considerations. In addition, the Extra Division provided guidance on the extent of the written reasons that the Committee was required to provided when considering what sanction to impose.

Hume v Nursing & Midwifery Council 2007 SC 644
In this appeal from the Conduct and Competence Committee of the Nursing and Midwifery Council the First Division considered whether it was competent to entertain a statutory appeal under the Nursing and Midwifery Order 2001 when the appeal was not presented within the time limit set by the relevant legislation. The court held that RCS 2.1(1) was applicable and that there was a discretion to relieve the appellant of the consequences of his failure to present his appeal timeously, provided that the court was satisfied that the failure was due to "mistake, oversight or other excusable cause". 

Fairlie v Perth & Kinross Healthcare NHS Trust 2004 SLT 1200
In this action a father sought damages from a health board in respect of alleged negligence by Y, a consultant psychiatrist, in the treatment of his daughter (X. Lord Kingarth held that there was nothing which indicated circumstances in which it could be said that Y came at any stage into a special relationship with the pursuer such that he owed a duty to him as well as to X; and that the appropriate means of redress where mere damage to reputation was caused by a statement or statements was an action of defamation and an action of damages based on a failure to fulfil a common law duty of care, without averment of any relevant consequential personal injury, was not a relevant head of loss.

Selected Public Law, Judicial Review & Human Rights Cases

McGeoch v Lord President of the Council 2011 S.L.T. 633
In this petition for judicial review Lord Tyre held that a convicted prisoner’s application for judicial review of the decision of the electoral registration officer refusing his application to have his name included on the register of local government electors, was incompetent where the applicant had failed to avail himself of the statutory remedy in the Representation of the People Act 1983, which afforded an effective means of seeking redress for any failure to respect his right to be registered to vote, and was not deficient in its ability to give effect to any EU law right to which he might be entitled.

Trustees of the Lithgows Ltd Pension Scheme v Board of the Pension Protection Fund 2011 S.C. 426
In this appeal by trustees of a multi-employer occupational pension scheme under the Pensions Act 2004 s.217(1) against a decision of the Pension Protection Fund Ombudsman rejecting their grounds of review in respect of a levy raised against them by the Board of the Pension Protection Fund the First Division held that it ought to be dismissed where the trustees sought to act on behalf of a participating employer in the scheme but the rights to seek a review of the amount of a levy, to refer a reviewable matter to the ombudsman and to appeal to the court against the board's determination were vested in the trustees only and they could not act in a representative capacity.

Miller & Martin v H.M. Advocate 2010 S.C. (U.K.S.C.) 40
This judgment of the UK Supreme Court provides guidance on the meaning and effect of the provisions in the Scotland Act 1998 which govern the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament. The Supreme Court held that The Criminal Proceedings etc. (Reform) (Scotland) Act 2007 section 45, which increased from 6 months to 12 months the maximum sentence that a sheriff sitting summarily could impose for an offence of driving while disqualified under the Road Traffic Act 1988 s.103(1)(b), was within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament.

McInnes v H.M. Advocate 2010 S.C. (U.K.S.C.) 28
In this appeal the Supreme Court held that although the Crown's failure to disclose to an accused material which might have materially weakened its case, or materially strengthened the accused's case, had been incompatible with Article 6(1) of the ECHR, that did not mean that the trial had been unfair. An appeal court would find that a trial had been unfair only if it found that there was a real possibility that the jury would have arrived at a different verdict had the disclosure been made.

Allison v H.M. Advocate 2010 S.C. (U.K.S.C.) 19
In this appeal the Supreme Court held that although the Crown's failure to disclose outstanding criminal charges relating to one of its witnesses was incompatible with the accused's rights under Article 6(1) of the ECHR, there had been no miscarriage of justice as there was no real possibility that the jury would have come to a different verdict if it had been aware of them.

Lloyds Pharmacy Ltd v National Appeal Panel 2010 S.C. 721
In this reclaiming motion the First Division held that The Lord Ordinary had correctly concluded that the National Appeal Panel had misdirected itself in failing to address the essential contention before it in an appeal against a health board’s refusal of a pharmacy operator’s application for inclusion in the pharmaceutical list, namely that the existing pharmaceutical provision was inadequate due to the absence of pharmaceutical services at a new health centre.