Angela Thomson Grahame QC is the Vice Dean of the Faculty of Advocates. She is the second woman to hold this position in the history of the Faculty.
Angela has extensive experience in many challenging and high profile cases.
Angela was the lead counsel in the Vale of Leven Public Inquiry for Greater Glasgow Health Board. This inquiry investigated 143 patients who contracted C Difficile, of whom 43 died as a result.
She was lead counsel representing the Lord Advocate in the Fingerprint Inquiry into the Shirley McKie trial. This Inquiry fundamentally changed the procedures for Fingerprint investigations in all criminal cases across Scotland.
In the last eighteen months, Angela has conducted the following proofs in the Court of Session:
Angela was also lead counsel and helped negotiate settlement in many claims, including a catastrophic brain injury case involving 24 hour care and valued at over ï¿½12 million.
Angela spent four years in court as a full time Advocate Depute and Senior Advocate Depute for the Crown, conducting complex and serious High Court criminal trials, Criminal Appeal Court cases and appeals in the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. Angela was appointed as an Ad Hoc Advocate Depute in 2017.
In addition to the above, Angela has also conducted judicial review. She has also argued to extend the law of liability for sexual abuse cases; harassment cases and Article 2 claims under ECHR. She was instructed for the International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund in the Braer actions. She has also acted in commercial actions, contractual disputes, variation of trust petitions in the Inner House and Outer House.
Angela Thomson Grahame QC is highly regarded by instructing agents and her colleagues in the Faculty of Advocates for her negotiation and advocacy skills.
This was a professional negligence claim against solicitors who failed to raise an action before the expiry of the triennium. This was a procedure roll debate for the pursuer before Lady Stacey. The pursuer argued that the defenders’ pleadings in relation to waiver were irrelevant and should not be admitted to probation. The defenders sought a PBA.
The defenders’ pleadings did not offer to prove that a statement by the employer's insurer in the early stages of litigation that the employer would not take a plea of time bar amounted to a unilateral promise or a waiver of the employer's right to later take that plea, and its averments relating to waiver were deleted from probation.
Reid v Forth Valley Health Board 
This medical negligence claim was dealt with under Chapter 42A and involved a lengthy proof in March 2016.
It related to the death of a husband and father due to the alleged negligence of a nurse and a junior doctor who made repeated attempts to reposition a displaced tracheostomy. They did not succeed. As a result, the deceased went into cardiac arrest and died. There were separate claims against the nurse and the doctor in relation to their responsibilities and actions and experts on both sides.
The family (the widow and son) claimed for loss of society/loss of support/services etc and also a secondary victim claim for psychiatric injury (nervous shock) due to the sight of the deceased in the immediate aftermath.
Phensrisai v Yutikan 
On 24 December 2012 the pursuer was involved in a road traffic accident where 3 Buddhist monks died and the pursuer sustained serious injuries on the A68 as they travelled to Scotland. The proof focused on issues relating to quantum. Prior to the accident, the pursuer had resigned as a Buddhist monk and commenced PhD studies in London. The court had to consider whether the pursuer would have completed his PhD studies and gone on to find employment if he had not sustained those injuries.
The decision is still awaited.
The pursuer alleged he contracted mesothelioma as a result of exposure to asbestos during his employment with the University when he entered the Old Library building when construction works were ongoing. No Scottish cases have gone to proof in relation to similar circumstances. It is very unusual for a mesothelioma case to proceed to proof and my agents were not aware of another in the recent past.
All issues (apart from diagnosis and quantum) were in dispute during the course of the proof (exposure; negligent exposure; causation). We heard evidence from Dr Moore Gillon, the defenders expert who is an internationally renowned expert.
The pursuer was a horse trainer. He was training a horse on a gallop when the horse fell on him and he sustained a serious shoulder injury which rendered him incapable of working. The pursuer alleged that this was due to the poor state of the gallop.
Arguments were made in terms of the Workplace (Health, Safety & Welfare) Regulations 1992 and also in relation to the Work at Height Regulations 2005, in respect of which there were no reported cases.
This was a very complicated case due to last minute issues which arose, which required changes to the pleadings and further investigations and expert evidence.
The latest edition of the Legal 500 has been published... Read More
In our news section previously, we reported that... Read More