James MacDonald
jamesmacdonald@arnotmanderson.co.uk
07799 692280
Areas of interest
Crime
Defamation and Media Law
Employment
Family
Health and Safety
Licensing
Public Law
Year of Call
2005
Devil Masters
Gary J. C. Allan, Q.C.
Robert G. Skinner
Summary of Practice
The main areas of work which James engages in are as follows:
Criminal: Trials, including regulatory crime, fraud, confiscation cases, environmental and health and safety prosecutions, together with the Criminal Appeal Court.
Employment: Constructive and unfair dismissal, redundancy, unlawful deduction of wages, breach of contract, and discrimination cases. He appears regularly for both Claimants and Respondents.
Family: Divorce and child law cases, including adoption.
Public Law: judicial review, human rights cases (including the European Court of Human Rights), liquor and taxi licensing appeals.
Prior to calling at the Bar, James was a solicitor specialising in litigation for 12 years, latterly at partner level. In addition, following grants of extended rights of audience before the criminal and civil courts in 2002 and 2003 respectively, he was only the third solicitor ever to hold full extended rights of audience before the Scottish Supreme Courts
Cases, trials, inquiries
1. Chief Constable of Tayside Police v Robert Basterfield (Perth Sheriff Court, 2007). A landmark case involving consideration, for the first time by a Scottish Court, of the scope of the provisions of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and in particular, “Sex Offender Protection Orders” under the Act, and their compatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights.
2. Campbell, Steele and Gray v HM Advocate 2004 SCCR 22 . This was the final instalment of the “Ice Cream Wars” appeal process which followed a referral to the Court of Criminal Appeal by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission.
The case is notable for the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal to entertain for the first time fresh evidence in the form of expert evidence by forensic linguists which sought, successfully, to contradict the evidence of police officers as to what they had told the trial jury they had heard the Accused say by way of “confession” to the murder.
Appointments
Ad-hoc Advocate Depute;
Tutor in Criminal Advocacy and Pleading, Glasgow Graduate School of Law