Astrid is Co-Director of Compass Chambers. She is a specialist in reparation, who is ranked in clinical negligence, personal injury and product liability by Chambers’ UK Bar Guide 2020. She has a special interest in clinical negligence, acting for both pursuers and defenders, together with expertise in medical product litigation. She has wide experience across the spectrum of complex personal injury cases, including occupational stress, catastrophic injury, industrial disease and public liability actions.
K v Chief Constable, Police Scotland CSIH 18;  CSOH 9
For the defenders, in a case where a former undercover police officer alleged psychiatric harm foreseeably arose from alleged "unfair treatment" at work. The defenders successfully reclaimed the decision after Proof, and an appeal to the Supreme Court has been lodged.
AH v Greater Glasgow Health Board and Johnson and Johnson Medical Limited; SR v Johnson and Johnson Medical Limited and Lothian Health Board; GR v Greater Glasgow Health Board and Johnson and Johnson Medical Limited  CSOH 57
As first junior on behalf of a major mesh manufacturer, in several hundred related claims. These were three allied cases, in relation to liability for medical products, two plead under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 and one at common law. The Court considered test for "defect" in a medical product in terms of the statute, and the common law test for product liability.
Grubb v Finlay 2018 SLT 463
The role of fundamental dishonesty in a personal injury claim, and a contra-award of expenses where no tender lodged.
Centenary 6 v Liquidators of Centenary Holdings 2018 SLT 423
The status of ATE insurance policy as equivalent to caution.
Brown and others v Craig Nevis Surgery  CSOH 84
Clinical negligence Proof, acting for the pursuers, where liability was established in relation to a GP’s failure to refer a patient suffering from chest pain to hospital.
AB v Dr Palanimurugan & others, Dumfries and Galloway HB  CSOH 26
A Proof on negligence and causation, in a GP and nursing negligence case, where the pursuer relied on a novel "material contribution" argument (Bailey v Ministry of Defence).
Little v Glen and Tradex Insurance  CSIH 99  CSOH 153
The role of the Appeal Court in a fact-sensitive case, the analysis of expert evidence and the role of the expert. The Proof arose from a road traffic accident which resulted in catastrophic head injuries. The defenders were assoilzied after Proof, which was reaffirmed by the Inner House.
Compass is delighted to announce that Geoff Clarke QC and Steve Love QC have... Read More
On 19thJune 2020 the Sheriff Principal published guidance on the resumption of business in... Read More