Law Society’s ‘nobbled’ referendum match on legal services reform likely to end up in a scrum at Murrayfield

Law Society’s Ian Smart. MURRAYFIELD STADIUM, Thursday 25 March, 10am might be worth an attendance to see the Govan Law Centre’s Mike Dailly (wannabe scrumhalf ?) have a go at the Law Society President Ian Smart (well-placed, keen hooker ?) during the Special General Meeting on the future of legal services reform in Scotland. The SGM has been called by the Scottish Law Agents Society (SLAS), which wants the Society to change the current policy of supporting alternative business structures (ABS), which members voted for at its 2008 AGM, to one opposing their introduction so we dont get abs and clients dont get the chance to go anywhere other than a solicitor for legal services.

In addition to the SGM, and Mike Dailly calling yet again for the resignation of Ian Smart, there is a nobbled ‘secret ballot referendum’, being run independently by the Electoral Reform Service, to encourage as many solicitors as possible to vote on ABS, and on whether the Society should regulate new business models. The referendum, which runs from 23 March to 7 April will allow the Society's Council to determine its future policy on ABS.

Ian Smart, president of the Society, said: “The Council was conscious that the critics of the result of the 2008 AGM continued to claim that the vote was not representative of the profession. The Council decided that in anticipation of high numbers of proxies again, which is a feature of Law Society general meetings, the vote at this special general meeting could attract the same criticism and concluded by a vote that a referendum of all members, one solicitor-one vote where there can be no proxy voting, would reflect the clear majority view of the profession.

"This means we are asking our members to vote twice, both in the referendum and at Thursday's SGM. The Society’s Council will then decide on a future policy in light of both votes and the respective levels of participation.

“The Legal Services (Scotland) Bill proposes major change and it's vital that solicitors fully consider what the government’s proposals could mean for their businesses and whether they should choose to continue as a traditional solicitors’ practice. There will be no compulsion for solicitors to change how they do business but there are a number of Scottish firms, many of which operate on a UK-wide and international basis, who want to be able to adapt to continue to meet the requirements of their clients, and to operate on a level playing field with their competitors in England and Wales.

“We want solicitors in Scotland to have opportunities now and in the future, to be able to thrive in Scotland and further a field, but not at the expense of independence, core values and principles, the very things that have given the Scottish legal profession such an enviable reputation.

“We have pressed hard for changes to the Bill. As a result we have won concessions from Community Safety Minister, Fergus Ewing, to drop parts of section 92 and with it remove any or even potential, government intervention in the appointment of lay members to the Society’s Council, and from the Justice Committee, which in its stage 1 report has recommended amendments to ensure that any ABS must have a fidelity fund equivalent to the existing Guarantee Fund and the continuation of existing consumer protections.

Mr Smart added: “There are several types of new business models that do not seem to have met with any major resistance from solicitors but we know there are genuine fears about the impact of external ownership or funding of law firms, their regulation and whether the independence of solicitors working there could be compromised.

“That is an important discussion for the profession to have and the Society is asking for members’ views in the current consultation on the types of models that could be permitted and how they should be regulated. I hope for a good debate on Thursday and that there is opportunity to examine and address some of the concerns that some of our members continue to have about the Bill’s proposals."

For those of you who have forgotten what this meeting is all about, watch the following video once more :

Mike Dailly ‘gets Smart’ ? : The road to alternative business structures

Catering, for those of you who wish to stuff faces while listening to this nobbled debate, is in the Presidents Suite, while the actual meeting, which starts at 10am, is in the Thistle Suite. Do remember to post your expectations & experiences of said nobbled debate & said nobbled referendum in the comments section ! (where is Uma Thurman with a Hattori Hanzo when we need her so ? – Ed)

Today’s Times newspaper reports on the accusations flying between both camps, the ones who want alternative business structures (ABS) and the ones who dont (Govan, GBA (or should that be GBH – Ed) etc …) :

Accusations fly ahead of ‘Tesco Law’ referendum
Mike Wade

Bitter divisions in the Scottish legal profession over the so-called Tesco Law burst into the open last night as the Law Society of Scotland (LSS) was accused of acting undemocratically ahead of a Special General Meeting (SGM) to determine contentious reforms to the legal profession.

At issue are proposals to enable legal firms to raise capital from outside investors, while banks and supermarkets could offer a full range of solicitors’ services.

High Street solicitors fear the new rules will enable the big firms to cut prices and cherry-pick the best paying work, such as conveyancing, leaving them with diminishing returns.

This week they accused the society of using its financial resources effectively to rig the meeting against them. The Govan Law Centre, one of the most vocal opponents of the change, said the society’s officials had drawn on confidential databases and its extensive organisational facilities to ensure the vote went their way. Mike Dailly, the centre’s principal solicitor, said they had been able “to help themselves to resources, paid for by members, to run their own campaign in favour of Tesco Law”.

The society has also been accused of calling on solicitors employed by government departments and financial institutions to vote in favour of the reforms.

Yesterday, Mr Dailly repeated a call for the resignation of Mike Smart, the society president, who was “ultimately responsible for this undemocratic process”.

The development came ahead of tomorrow’s meeting, at Murrayfield Stadium, which the society hopes will ratify a decision to implement the reforms, known as Alternative Business Structures (ABS.) They were first adopted by the Society at its 2008 AGM, and now form an integral part of the Legal Services (Scotland) Bill.

As The Times revealed four weeks ago, the Scottish Law Agents Society — representing 1,500 solicitors — was confident it would overturn Law Society policy when it “requisitioned” an SGM last month. Now, it seems, it is not so confident.

Meanwhile the Law Society has met the objections head on by proposing a referendum, based on one member, one vote, to be overseen by the Electoral Reform Society, and to follow the SGM.

Explaining its position, a spokesman said: “There could be serious consequences from division. The society want one vote, one view. I can think of no more democratic process.” The spokesman added that it was quite proper for the LSS to promote policies that had been democratically endorsed two years ago. Last night, however, there were signs that the divisions were deepening. Critics insist that the Law Society rushed through its policy on ABS in 2008, and said it was now attempting to influence both the SGM and the referendum.

In particular, a letter from Janet Hood, the chairman of the society’s In House Lawyers Group, has caused apoplexy amongst its critics. It urged solicitors within government departments, financial institutions or charities, “to attend the SGM or to vote by proxy to support the society’s position”.

“This is twisting our motion,” said Ian Ferguson, a board member of the Scottish Law Agents Society. “Our motion has always been about the external ownership of legal firms. This is about getting the votes of other groups, because they know they won’t get the support of high street solicitors.”

Would Granny swear by Levy McRae ? Law firm in the dock as newspapers ‘evaluate relationship’ with legal advisers over Steven Purcell scandal

Peter Watson of Levy McRae, back from the Cayman Islands ? In an editorial comment in today’s Sunday Herald, further extraordinary details have emerged about the involvement of the well known Glasgow law firm Levy McRae, along with its senior partner Peter Watson and the crisis management media specialists Media House, in attempts to manage media coverage of the scandal surrounding the Glasgow City Council Chief Steven Purcell, who fled the country after resigning by telephone.

The Sunday Herald ends its editorial by stating : “We are taking this problem very seriously and are assessing our relationship with our legal advisers this week. We certainly need to be assured that there is no potential for similar conflicts of interest in future and we are making our position very clear to Levy & McRae.”

Levy & McRae’s actions led to arrest of investigative journalist Robert Green. Taking into account the recent actions of Levy McRae on behalf of Scotland’s top law officer, Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini, in the Hollie Greig case, actions which led to the arrest of journalist & broadcaster Robert Green, who had been investigating claims of an Aberdeen based paedophile ring linking members of Scotland’s legal establishment, alleged to have abused vulnerable & disabled children, then yes, perhaps its time for the media and a few other clients to assess their relationship with Levy McRae …

Incidentally, the Herald & Sunday Herald have done an excellent job of reporting on the Steven Purcell case …

The Sunday Herald reports :

PR, politics and the press: A conflict of interest but no barrier to the truth

EDITORIAL COMMENT Published on 21 Mar 2010

The shockwaves emanating from the controversial departure of Glasgow City Council leader Steven Purcell have shaken the foundations of Glasgow’s political and business establishment.

The initial facts were bad enough: allegations of drug-taking, cover-ups, incoherent ramblings, paranoia, a stay at a clinic specialising in the treatment of drink and drug problems, and finally Mr Purcell’s retreat from Scotland, reportedly for up to a year.

Since Mr Purcell’s departure, speculation has grown ever more fevered, encompassing suggestions of a network of powerful figures working behind the scenes to influence the workings of the city. The suggestion that this so-called network includes leading figures from the media is now threatening to undermine public confidence in the integrity of the Scottish press.

There have been hints that some Scottish newspapers have pulled their punches on the controversy because editors have been too close to Mr Purcell or, worse, they have been cowed into submission by Peter Watson and PR firm Media House. These suggestions have involved the Herald & Times Group, publishers of this newspaper, The Herald and the Evening Times. Other newspapers have also been referred to. We believe our readers should learn the facts here rather than read assumptions in the pages of other publications.

Glasgow is a large city but its political and business centre is small. Personal and business relationships meld together, contacts extend and overlap, boundaries blur. Business dinners become social occasions, colleagues become friends. Such social networking goes on in every city in the world. It only becomes a problem when a conflict of interest arises.

We believe our readers should learn the facts here rather than read assumptions in other publications

For the Herald & Times Group that conflict of interest arose when solicitors Levy & McRae, the firm we employ to ensure the legality of our editorial content, was engaged to act on behalf of Steven Purcell in the early stages of the controversy. The Herald broke the news of Mr Purcell’s resignation as council leader in a story by Paul Hutcheon on Tuesday, March 2.

Peter Watson, of Levy & McRae, and Jack Irvine, of Media House, acted for Mr Purcell as the crisis unfolded. In the most recent documents lodged with Companies House, Mr Watson is listed as one of four shareholders of Media House, along with Mr Irvine and two other individuals. Mr Watson has told us that he holds the shares as a representative of a trust for Mr Irvine’s children.

Mr Watson and Mr Irvine denied reports that Glasgow City Council’s PR department planned to issue a statement referring to Steven Purcell’s “chemical dependency”. When released, the official statement referred only to Mr Purcell’s “stress” and “exhaustion”.

They warned that a story in The Scotsman newspaper revealing details of the deleted reference to “chemical dependency” could be a breach of the Data Protection Act and be referred to the Information Comissioner. The media was also warned that inquiring into Mr Purcell’s health might breach his right to a private life under the European Convention of Human Rights.

The Sunday Herald’s analysis of the Steven Purcell controversy on March 7 included an article criticising the tactics of Mr Watson and Mr Irvine. To avoid a further conflict of interest, the article was not scrutinised for legal problems by a full-time employee of Levy & McRae but by a QC acting as an independent adviser, although still under the overall umbrella of the Levy & McRae contract with the Herald & Times Group.

After the story’s publication, the Sunday Herald was contacted separately by both Peter Watson and Jack Irvine. We will not reveal the details of private telephone calls with Peter Watson but the results of those calls could be seen in last week’s Sunday Herald. We printed a correction of one factual inaccuracy: we had said Mr Watson and Mr Irvine had left Scotland to go “on holiday” around the same time as Mr Purcell had left the country. In fact Mr Watson and Mr Irvine had both left on business trips to the Cayman Islands. We also printed a letter from Mr Watson complaining about our coverage. We agreed to print the letter to fulfil our duty to offer a right of reply.

In response to separate complaints from Mr Irvine we offered the same factual correction and the same opportunity to submit a letter for publication, subject to our normal editing procedures. He refused both offers.

In an article in industry magazine PRWeek on March 10, Mr Irvine revealed he had lodged a complaint with the Sunday Herald. He said he had asked for an apology and that he would refer the matter to the Press Complaints Commission if his request was refused.

Mr Irvine has now submitted a complaint to the Press Complaints Commission against the Sunday Herald article. He has complained on two counts:

1: By stating that he and Mr Watson had gone on holiday the Sunday Herald implied that he had left Mr Purcell “in the lurch”.

2: The Sunday Herald launched a “vicious attack” on the methods he and Mr Watson had employed without giving either the right to comment or reply before publication, allegedly in breach of the Editor’s Code of Practice.

Mr Irvine referred to previous “problems” he had experienced with the Sunday Herald, including discussions this newspaper had had with Mr Watson over a story concerning another Media House client earlier this year.

Mr Irvine claims to the Press Complaints Commission that the Sunday Herald’s article on the Steven Purcell tactics was “heavily influenced by spite, bad blood and malice”. The Sunday Herald will defend itself against Mr Irvine’s accusations through the normal channels.

There have been other references in the media to the friendship between Steven Purcell and leading newspaper editors, including Herald & Times editor-in-chief Donald Martin. Mr Martin met Mr Purcell and prominent figures in the Glasgow business community on a fairly regular basis and both were part of a network dubbed “Team Glasgow”.

Mr Martin told the Sunday Herald: “I was glad to play a role in Team Glasgow along with other individuals who believed in co-operating for the good of the city. Our aim was to encourage actions which would help the city. As a newspaper editor it is an important part of my job to make contacts in the political, business and other spheres and I also believe it is part of my job to work for the good of Glasgow and indeed Scotland. There is no conflict between that aim and my commitment to publishing the facts of stories which are important to the lives of our readers.

‘‘The Herald broke the news of Steven Purcell’s resignation and has continued to inform our readers of the major developments in this story. We remain committed to uncovering the full facts surrounding Mr Purcell’s departure, many of which remain obscured. We will work to uncover the truth, no matter how long it may take. There is no evidence of a ‘conspiracy of silence’. Indeed, the facts render such an allegation ridiculous.”

There remains the question of a conflict of interest regarding Peter Watson in his roles as legal adviser to the Herald & Times Group and as a listed shareholder in Media House. Levy & McRae’s website offers a service described as “reputation management”. It states: “With a low profile, we aim to keep our clients off the front page and take swift, effective action where required. Being networked at the highest levels and having access to major decision-makers is key to our success.”

One media organisation asked the Herald & Times Group last week if such a statement could be reconciled with the aims of our newspapers.

Herald & Times managing director Tim Blott said he was extremely concerned at the conflict of interest which had arisen in the Steven Purcell case. He said: “We are taking this problem very seriously and are assessing our relationship with our legal advisers this week. We certainly need to be assured that there is no potential for similar conflicts of interest in future and we are making our position very clear to Levy & McRae.”

Sheriff Graeme Buchanan obtains gagging order against journalist investigating Aberdeen sex abuse ring claims

Journalist & broadcaster Robert Green arrested after Sheriff gained gagging order over abuse claims. Newspapers are now reporting a story reported earlier by Scottish Law Reporter of an interdict obtained by Sheriff Graeme Buchanan against journalist & broadcaster Robert Green, who had travelled to Aberdeen in connection with his investigations into an alleged paedophile ring, linking senior members of Scotland’s legal establishment who stand accused of abusing vulnerable & disabled children.

The interdict, obtained by Edinburgh Law Firm Simpson & Marwick, apparently acting in conjunction with Glasgow law firm Levy McRae, who also represent Elish Angiolini, Scotland’s Lord Advocate, led to the arrest of Mr Green, and his house in Cheshire being raided by Grampian Police officers.

The Press & Journal reports :

Would-be MP banned from making paedophile allegations

Sheriff gets court order to silence abuse claim

By Ryan Crighton Published: 18/03/2010

An Aberdeen sheriff has obtained a gagging order against a would-be MP who has accused him of abusing a young, disabled girl.

Sheriff Graham Buchanan was forced to resort to legal action after Robert Green continued to spread the allegations against him, despite two separate police investigations finding there was no truth in them.

Mr Green, who describes himself as a lay legal adviser, is representing Hollie Greig, who has Down’s syndrome and who alleges that she was systematically abused by a paedophile ring for 14 years from the age of six.

Mr Green has named a number of men and women, including Sheriff Buchanan and a now-deceased former senior policeman, as having taken part in the abuse.

The sheriff’s lawyers, Edinburgh-based Simpson and Marwick, have now successfully applied to the Court of Session in Edinburgh for an interim interdict preventing Mr Green from continuing his campaign.

The interdict also prevents Mr Green from claiming that the sheriff was involved in the “murder” of Hollie’s uncle, Robert Greig, who died in a car fire in 1997.

Grampian Police investigated the sex-abuse claims in 2000 and again late last year and concluded on both occasions that the accusations were baseless.

The day after the interim interdict was granted, Mr Green was arrested as he left a guesthouse in Aberdeen.

He appeared at Stonehaven Sheriff Court on February 15, following his arrest, charged with a breach of the peace. He made no plea and was released on bail. The case is expected to call again later this year.

Mr Green, 63, claims one of the bail conditions bars him from entering the north-east, which he says will hinder his plans to try to win the Aberdeen South seat at the general election, widely expected to be on May 6.

The Court of Session interdict, granted by Lord Emslie, bans Mr Green, of 4 Birchdale Road, Warrington, Cheshire, from communicating false and defamatory statements about the sheriff at Aberdeen Sheriff Court or anywhere else in Scotland.

The false statements are listed in papers as:

That the sheriff was involved in sexually abusing Hollie Greig.

That the sheriff has been involved in covering up the sexual abuse.

That he was involved in the “murder” of Hollie Greig’s uncle, Robert Greig.

The same restrictions apply to anyone acting on Mr Green’s behalf or on his instructions. The interdict also bars Mr Green from harassing the sheriff by making the claims at all.

Sheriff Buchanan – who has accused Mr Green of mounting a “campaign of harassment” – declined to comment yesterday.

Hollie claims she was abused for 14 years from the age of six and has given police the names of some of the men she says assaulted her.

The 30-year-old and her mother, Anne, have been campaigning for criminal proceedings since 2000.

The abuse is alleged to have taken place in Aberdeen, and Hollie and her mother claim to have made a statement at Bucksburn police station in July that year naming those allegedly involved.

The family moved to Shropshire and two Grampian Police officers travelled to Shrewsbury in September last year to re-interview Hollie at a special facility.

In January, the Crown Office said there was not enough reliable evidence to proceed with the case.

Despite no charges ever being brought, Hollie received £13,500 compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority in April last year.

It is understood that followed evidence from a Grampian detective inspector, who described Hollie as “a truthful witness to the best of her ability and an entirely innocent victim”.

Mrs Greig, 58, claims her daughter has experienced nightmares and panic attacks since she first told her about the alleged abuse.

Fatal Accident Inquiry into death of Lisa Norris abandoned after expert witness ‘changes his mind’ over radiation overdose at Beatson Institute

The Fatal Accident Inquiry into the death of teenager Lisa Norris, who was given huge overdoses of radiation during treatment at the Beatson Oncology Centre in Glasgow for a brain tumour, was abandoned today, after the ‘expert witness’, Professor Sikora ‘revised’ his initial opinion that Lisa might have survived, had it not been for the overdoses of radiation treatment at the Beatson Centre. The medic who administered the overdoses of radiation to Lisa, kept his job, reported the Daily Record.

During today’s hearing the Procurator Fiscal in the case, Lesley Thomson was at pains to inform the court of the following : “It is clear that there no longer exists any controversy surrounding the cause of Lisa's death and the cause of Lisa's tragic death is clear” (Hands up anyone who believes that ?) Ms Thomson’s statement in full can be read along with the coverage of today’s events from BBC News, which has left many wondering over the events of today and the tragic circumstances of Lisa Norris death :

BBC News reports :

Radiation overdose 'did not kill' teenager Lisa Norris

A fatal accident inquiry into the death of a teenager who was given accidental overdoses of radiation during treatment for a brain tumour has been abandoned.

Lisa Norris, who was 15 and from Girvan in Ayrshire, died a few months after the treatment at Beatson Oncology Centre in Glasgow in 2006. The inquiry was abandoned after all parties agreed her illness caused her death rather than the overdose. The proceedings were formally wound up at Glasgow Sheriff Court on Monday.

Miss Norris was given 58% too much radiation during her treatment at the Beatson and died at her family home on 18 October 2006. An internal inquiry following her death found that she had died from her tumour and not from the overdose.

“It is clear that there no longer exists any controversy surrounding the cause of Lisa's death and the cause of Lisa's tragic death is clear” - Procurator Fiscal Lesley Thomson

However, that was disputed by an independent report from one of the country's top cancer experts.

At Glasgow Sheriff Court on Monday, Procurator Fiscal Lesley Thomson said any disagreement among experts had now been resolved. "The medical experts who are all in full possession of the facts and the initial differing opinions have ultimately concluded that there is no causal link between the radiation overdose and Lisa's death," she said.

Ms Thomson said that the Norris family also accepted this conclusion and were of the opinion that a fatal accident inquiry (FAI) should not go ahead.

"Shortly after the continued preliminary hearing on 22 February the representatives of Lisa's family advised me that the family had reached the view that they were content that a full investigation had been carried out, that there was no causal link between the radiation overdose and Lisa's death and that they did not want the fatal accident inquiry and the leading of evidence now to take place," she said.

'No dispute'

Ms Thomson added: "They also accepted that the Beatson, since the date of the radiation overdose error, had taken steps to rectify the problem by reviewing their systems and had improved and replaced them to seek to ensure that such an error could not occur again.

"Following the representations therefore by the family and the Greater Glasgow Health Board it is clear that there no longer exists any controversy surrounding the cause of Lisa's death and the cause of Lisa's tragic death is clear."

Ms Thomson told the court that as there were "no matters of dispute that require to be aired in public, it is not appropriate to cause any further anxiety and distress to the bereaved relatives by the hearing of evidence".

She asked for the fatal accident inquiry to be abandoned and said such a move would also avoid any unnecessary expenses to the parties involved and the public purse.

I think the family are disappointed that Professor Sikora was unable to adhere to his initial view but they accept that it was not appropriate for the FAI to proceed in these circumstances - Cameron Fyfe (Norris family lawyer)

Ms Thomson also asked that the court make a formal determination that Miss Norris died as a result of "recurrent pineoblastoma" or brain tumour. That was agreed to by Sheriff Principal James Alistair Taylor.

Miss Norris's father, Ken, did not want to comment directly on the proceedings.

But his lawyer, Cameron Fyfe, said: "We had a report from Professor Sikora, an expert in oncology, who confirmed that Lisa would probably have survived had it not been for the overdose.

"After further inquiry the professor revised his report to say it was a possibility, not a probability.

"Proof in Scots law is based on the balance of probabilities and that is not enough for the fiscal to proceed with the fatal accident inquiry.

"I think the family are disappointed that Professor Sikora was unable to adhere to his initial view but they accept that it was not appropriate for the FAI to proceed in these circumstances."

Mr Fyfe said the Norris family would continue its civil action against NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde over the treatment she was given. However, they will now seek compensation only for the pain and suffering that Miss Norris went through as a result of the overdose, and not for her death.

and the statement in full from Ms Thomson, the Procurator Fiscal :

In full: Statement on Lisa Norris FAI

Lesley Thomson (pictured), area procurator fiscal for Glasgow and Strathkelvin, invited Glasgow Sheriff Court to make a formal determination in terms of Section 6 of the Fatal Accident and Sudden Deaths Inquiry (Scotland) Act 1976.

It reads as follows - 6(a) that Lisa Jayne Norris died on 18 October 2006 at 16 Downhill Road, Girvan, Ayrshire; (b) that the cause of death was recurrent pineoblastoma.

Here is her statement in full.

"I am seeking a formal determination at today's FAI hearing. I do not propose to lead any evidence and I present to your Lordship the post mortem report in respect of Lisa Jayne Norris.

"I can advise that steps have been taken to stand down witnesses cited to give evidence and to alert parties' representatives in advance of this morning's hearing of the Crown' position as set out in this statement.

"I understand that all parties are content with the Crown's approach today.

"The background and reason for my submission today is as follows:

"In late July 2005 Lisa Jayne Norris (born 7 April 1990 - then aged 15) contacted NHS 24 and thereafter her GP with complaints of abdominal pain, vomiting, fever and headaches.

"From late July until mid August Lisa attended her GP, was referred to the paediatric Department of Ayr Hospital and then admitted to Ayr Hospital on 17 August and transferred to the Southern General Hospital on 18 August.

"At that time following a biopsy she was diagnosed as having pineoblastoma.

"Lisa's treatment for this cancer was a combination of chemotherapy and radiotherapy. She received chemotherapy at the Sick Children's Hospital Yorkhill and the radiotherapy at the Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre.

"It has been established and accepted by all parties that she received an accidental overdose of radiotherapy treatment at the Beatson between 5 January 2006 and 31 January 2006.

"This error was discovered on 31 January 2006. An investigation into the circumstances of that error was carried out by Dr Arthur Johnston, Inspector appointed by the Scottish Ministers.

"Lisa died on 18 October 2006 and the circumstances of her death including the cause of her death and the cause of the accidental overdose were investigated by the Crown including the instruction of medical experts.

"At the same time these causes were investigated by representatives for Lisa's parents and by Greater Glasgow Health Board.

"It is of course my duty as the Procurator Fiscal to enquire into certain categories of deaths including the accidental and unexplained to establish exact causal links and to allay any public anxiety and concern.

"Thereafter I report the results of my enquiries to Crown Counsel.

"I did that in this case and a Fatal Accident Inquiry was instructed by the Lord Advocate in order to establish the cause of death and whether or not there was any causal link with the radiation overdose.

"During the investigations by parties there were differing medical views expressed by experts and that continued until very recently. One expert thought there was a link between the accidental overdose of radiation therapy and Lisa's death.

"However, by mid-February 2010 as a result of further detailed enquiries and discussions with experts it was established and agreed that this was not the case and that no such link could be substantiated.

"The medical experts who are all in full possession of the facts and the initial differing opinions have ultimately concluded that there is no causal link between the radiation overdose and Lisa's death.

"At the second preliminary hearing on 22 February 2010 the representatives for Lisa's family indicated to your Lordship that the family accepted that there was no causal link between the accidental overdose and her death.

"In light of the statements made to the court by the representatives of the family and Greater Glasgow Health Board that further consideration be given to the holding of a Fatal Accident Inquiry at which evidence would be led I considered I should review the circumstances.

"Shortly after the continued preliminary hearing on 22 February the representatives of Lisa's family advised me that the family had reached the view that they were content that a full investigation had been carried out, that there was no causal link between the radiation overdose and Lisa's death and that they did not want the Fatal Accident Inquiry and the leading of evidence now to take place.

"They also accepted that the Beatson since the date of the radiation overdose error had taken steps to rectify the problem by reviewing their systems and had improved and replaced them to seek to ensure that such an error could not occur again.

"Following the representations therefore by the family and the Greater Glasgow Health Board it is clear that there no longer exists any controversy surrounding the cause of Lisa's death and the cause of Lisa's tragic death is clear.

"The decision to hold the Fatal Accident Inquiry at public expense has been reviewed.

"There is a continuing duty on the Crown to review the need for a Fatal Accident Inquiry in light of materially changed circumstances and if, as in this case, there are no matters of dispute that require to be aired in public it is not appropriate to cause any further anxiety and distress to the bereaved relatives by the hearing of evidence - nor the incurring of expenses by any of the parties' representatives or indeed the cost of the FAI much of which would fall on the public purse.

"However, in saying that I do need to make it absolutely clear that the decision was not taken on the grounds of costs but on the issues of causation and the steps taken by the Beatson to address the radiation overdose error.

"In all the circumstances therefore and in view of the following facts:

• that there is now no dispute about the accidental radiation overdose error

• the constructive steps taken since by the Beatson to review and improve systems

• and the cause of Lisa's death having been established and agreed

the circumstances have been reviewed and the Crown is now seeking a formal determination in terms of Section 6 of the Fatal Accident and Sudden Deaths Inquiry (Scotland) Act 1976 as follows:-

6(a) that Lisa Jayne Norris died on 18 October 2006 at 16 Dowhill Road, Girvan, Ayrshire;

(b) that the cause of death was recurrent pineoblastoma.

"May I conclude by offering my condolences to Lisa's parents and family for their tragic loss, a loss which they have borne throughout with great dignity."

Law Society President Ian Smart & Govan Law Centre’s Mike Dailly debate Legal Services Bill reforms – solicitors don't price fix !

Debate over the proposed reforms to the legal profession’s business model in Scotland as contained in the Legal Services Bill, currently going through the Scottish Parliament, finally made television yesterday with appearances from the Ian Smart, the current Law Society President, and Mike Dailly of the Govan Law Centre. Missing in action from the debate was someone from the consumer lobby, who stand to gain the most from the proposed reforms, which will allow Scottish consumers a much needed choice in who they wish to purchase legal services from.

Banks, supermarkets and others are eventually expected to enter the legal services market if the bill becomes law, hence the ‘headless chickens’ syndrome affecting some parts of the legal profession, reported in the Herald newspaper HERE last week, and covered in Peter Cherbi’s “Diary of Injustice” law blog HERE

Ian Smart & Mike Dailly discuss the Legal Services Bill, splits between lawyers, and price fixing (solicitors of course, do not price fix , haha – Ed)

Cocaine, Lawyers & Politicians : Ex-Glasgow City Chief Steven Purcell flees UK after law firm Levy McRae's legal spin shatters his political career

Former Glasgow City Council Chief Steven Purcell. After our report last week on the scandal surrounding the resignation of Steven Purcell, the former head of Glasgow City Council, newspapers have today revealed Mr Purcell has fled the UK after a bizarre week of developments which began with his resignation, and today ended up with revelations of Class A drug use (cocaine), a possible attempted suicide during a brief stay at Castle Craig Hospital in the Borders and reported encounters with the Scottish Crime & Drugs Enforcement Agency last year during his leadership of Glasgow City Council.

Peter Watson (now on holiday in the Cayman Islands) of Levy McRae represented Steven Purcell. Amid all the twists & turns of last week, where Glasgow Law firm Levy & McRae, principally Peter Watson who, along with public relations expert Jack Irvine of Media House PR group, attempted (but failed, spectacularly - Ed) to stage manage media reporting & investigation of the downfall of his client Mr Purcell, lessons should be learned on how not to approach a scandal using bullying tactics & veiled threats against journalists & the national media over a story which most certainly has a place in the public eye, not least as Mr Purcell had apparently been using Class A drugs for sometime, while leading Scotland’s largest local authority.

Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini hired Levy McRae to go after disabled abuse victim Hollie Greig. Mr Purcell's judgement in bringing in a notorious law firm & pr company to handle his 'departure leaves many questions and much damage. Perhaps it might have been the case some were too enthralled with Levy McRae’s successes in silencing media expsures, such as Mr Watson's recent success for his client, the Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini, where Scottish newspapers were bullied into not reporting on the allegations of abuse made by downs syndrome girl Hollie Greig who identified several senior members of Scotland’s legal establishment, led to interdicts gained by Levy McRae who represent the Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini, and a Sheriff identified by Ms Greig in the course of making her allegations. Such was the desperation of Levy McRae and their clients to keep Hollie Greig’s case under wraps and out of the public eye, Grampian Police were ordered to arrest journalist Robert Green, who had been investigating & reporting on Ms Greig’s case.

Alas there was to be no similar success, as fortunately the media were having none of Levy McRae's spin or attempts to block legitimate reporting of events surrounding their client, the now former head of Glasgow City Council who has now had to flee the country. (Must have been some bender he went on - Ed)

However, as has been revealed today in the national media, Peter Watson of Levy McRae, along with Jack Irvine of Media House have went off on a holiday to that well known bastion of honesty, the Cayman Islands (Cayman Islands, oh yes, that's the place were the likes of drugs dealers, tax cheats, dictators, killers, abusers, embezzlers and yes, lawyers, stuff their money, isn't it ? – Ed)

Today the Sunday Herald reports on the Steven Purcell scandal, also giving a good insight into the abysmal failure of Levy McRae & Media House, who have by the looks of it, ended up ruining their own client. We all know who to blame …

How PR advisers made a crisis out of a drama

Despite his manifest problems, Steven Purcell might still have had an outside chance of returning to politics had it not been for the disastrous way his departure was handled. Instead of heeding his council advisers and fellow councillors and opting for full disclosure, he turned to crisis PR guru Jack Irvine of Media House and litigation lawyer Peter Watson of Levy & McRae (pictured).

But his choice of two of the biggest hitters in Scotland’s media scene immediately alerted the press to the fact that there was more to the story than met the eye.

The Irvine-Watson campaign was so old-school it was prehistoric. Aggressive and clumsy, it tried to cow the mainstream media into accepting that Mr Purcell’s problems were limited to stress and exhaustion, and seemed to ignore the inevitability of more details leaking out, especially via the internet.

It was also hopelessly confused. On Wednesday, when it was revealed that council officials had referred to “chemical dependency” in an early draft of a statement explaining Mr Purcell’s resignation, Mr Irvine issued a statement saying the story had “no foundation”.

However, later in the day, Mr Watson’s side wrote to the UK Information Commissioner complaining that council officials appeared to have broken the Data Protection Act by providing information about Mr Purcell’s health to the media – thus suggesting there was a solid basis to the story.

Throughout the campaign on behalf of Mr Purcell, the media was warned that inquiring into his health might breach his right to a private life under the European Convention on Human Rights. However, on Thursday Levy & McRae released a statement from Dr Florian Kaplick, a consultant psychiatrist at Castle Craig hospital, which provided new medical details. It confirmed Mr Purcell had been a patient at the rehab clinic for three days, having been admitted by his family and a consultant, Dr Raymond Dempsey. It also said Mr Purcell had not been treated for “a drug problem”, but did not deny he had one.

Media House admits to having an “on-off” PR relationship with Castle Craig. The release undermined any notion that Mr Purcell’s health was out of bounds.

After presiding over the debacle, on Friday Mr Watson and Mr Irvine flew first-class to the Cayman Islands for a week’s holiday at a five-star hotel. Mr Purcell was also reported to have fled Scotland, but in less glamorous circumstances.

One senior PR consultant said: “The principle that applies to politicians who err in their personal life is ‘Get it out there.’ In most of these stories there’s a bit of pathos. They have to put up their hands and say, ‘I’ve made some stupid decisions, I’ve paid for it, and I’m now trying to rebuild my life.’ They have to be honest and straightforward and show some humility.”

Unfortunately for Mr Purcell, it is now too late.

Purcell: the end of the line

Special Report by Tom Gordon and Paul Hutcheon Published on 7 Mar 2010

The officers of the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency are not average police.

The detectives of the elite squad don't spend their days huckling shoplifters or sweeping drunks off the streets at closing time. Instead, their duties are focused on the most serious and violent criminals in the country. They investigate the bosses of organised crime, seize their drugs, and freeze cash and assets."

So when two SCDEA officers spoke to Steven Purcell last year about his name cropping up in an investigation, it was never going to be a run-of-the-mill chat.

That meeting, in Mr Purcell’s office in Glasgow’s City Chambers on May 12 last year, was the first glimpse of the scandal which finally broke around him last week.

Questioned afterwards by his closest colleagues, the leader of Glasgow City Council denied he was using cocaine, but admitted to having dabbled with the drug in the past.

It also emerged that some of those around him in the Yoker area of the city, where he grew up, were the subject of the SCDEA’s interest. Mr Purcell was also warned by his aides that they would resign if he took drugs again.

One friend said there was a strong suspicion that his rapid decline after he returned from London was the result of him “crashing” after a binge.

Uneasy, but satisfied that steps were being taken to address the situation, the staff went back to work. Shorty afterwards, Mr Purcell moved out of Yoker to a flat in Broomhill Drive in the city’s west end, to distance himself from his old contacts. His new landlord was Katrina Scott Moore, the former partner of Brian Dempsey, a property developer and former Celtic FC director, and a friend of Mr Purcell.

Over the next 10 months, the issue faded away as fresh political crises over school closures, the bill for the 2014 Commonwealth Games, and the Glasgow North East by-election came and went.

But if any of Mr Purcell’s inner circle harboured nagging doubts about their boss, their fears would soon resurface.

The last week in February began ordinarily enough for Mr Purcell, with a formal meeting with James Dornan, leader of the SNP group on the Labour-run city council. On the Tuesday, February 23 ,Mr Purcell went to London for two nights to attend a dinner held by the Scottish Council for Development & Industry – one more night than was strictly necessary.

Almost immediately after he came back on Thursday February 25, he went to a Labour fundraising event at the Hilton Hotel in Glasgow which was attended by Gordon Brown. Many of the guests who saw Mr Purcell say that – at least until midnight – he appeared well.

However, a fellow councillor finally became so concerned by his agitation that they put Mr Purcell in a car and sent him home.

The next morning, the councillor’s fears were justified. Although Mr Purcell was in his office early, staff found the 37-year-old in tears and talking “gibberish”. It was clear he was unwell. Despite regaining control for an 11am meeting, afterwards he deteriorated again, cancelling an engagement with the restaurateur Charan Gill and then walking out of the City Chambers.

After a brief return late in the afternoon, he left again and in the evening sent a text message to a colleague, who realised Mr Purcell was badly stressed. He also began seriously discussing resignation.

The next day, two of Purcell’s closest aides visited him at Broomhill Drive – his advisers Brian Lironi and Colin Edgar, head of press at Glasgow City Council. They are said to have found him “in bits”, according to council insiders. Again, he was talking about resignation.

During the day, Mr Purcell was asked about drug use. According to a source close to events, he admitted taking cocaine in the past. However, he did not regard cocaine as a problem – his problem was with alcohol. Mr Purcell had missed meetings on Monday mornings after over-indulging at the weekend.

But there was scepticism about his answers. One friend said there was a strong suspicion that his rapid decline after he returned from London was the result of him “crashing” after a binge. Mr Purcell had also developed a raging paranoia, and believed even his most trusted colleagues were plotting against him.

Despite reports last week that his advisers and family members tried to talk Mr Purcell out of resigning, no-one actually did. Instead the discussion was about whether he should quit immediately or wait until the annual general meeting of the city Labour group in May. If it was the latter, the plan was to clear his diary for eight weeks, and use the time to let him recuperate and line up a job outside politics.

The following morning, however, Mr Purcell’s condition deteriorated, and he was described by those around him as being exceptionally unwell. A long talk with Dr Raymond Dempsey, a therapist and the brother of Brian Dempsey, had convinced Mr Purcell’s friends that the councillor needed professional help.

With Mr Purcell’s agreement, Dr Dempsey referred the politician to the Castle Craig hospital in Peebleshire, which claims to be one of Europe’s top rehabilitation centres for treating drink and drug addiction.

Mr Purcell’s younger brother, Gerry, drove him there on Sunday night. But he was later called by the hospital and asked to return: Mr Purcell had gone missing from the open facility. Many of his friends feared the worst.

He later returned under his own steam, but his clothes were soaked, and it was feared there had been a suicide attempt involving open water.

It is also understood that discussions took place within the hospital that night on whether to section Mr Purcell.

On Monday morning, his council staff met in Glasgow City Chambers to discuss his future. All agreed that Mr Purcell had to

quit immediately. A senior aide was delegated to make the phone call. To his surprise, he found that Mr Purcell had changed his mind overnight and decided to stay on as leader.

He felt he was better and would have the support of his fellow Labour councillors, he insisted.

The aide urged him to reconsider and gave him half an hour to think about resigning, saying that if he went immediately there was still a chance he might be able to resurrect his career. But when the aide called back, Mr Purcell was adamant.

An aide then updated the three Labour councillors closest to Mr Purcell – Paul Carey, Paul Rooney and George Ryan – about the events of the weekend.

Deputy council leader Jim Coleman and Labour group chairwoman Jean McFadden were also briefed, as were council chief executive George Black, chief solicitor Ian Drummond and Labour group business manager Aileen Colleran.

Ms Colleran then alerted Colin Smyth, the general secretary of the Scottish Labour Party. By mid-afternoon, all knew of Mr Purcell’s problems.

Around the same time, Mr Carey, Mr Rooney and Mr Ryan concluded that Mr Purcell needed to resign for the sake of his own health. Mr Lironi, Mr Edgar and Michell McGinty – another adviser to the council leader – then began drafting a statement referring to drink and drugs.

Their “full disclosure” strategy was based on the idea that Mr Purcell could have a future as a politician if he was seen to be honest about his problems. Mr Ryan – who had been Mr Purcell’s right-hand man when he toppled Charlie Gordon to become council leader in 2005 – had the grim task of asking his old friend to stand down.

But by 4pm, after several calls with Mr Ryan, Mr Purcell was still refusing to go. He did, however, agree to a public statement explaining his sudden “leave of absence”. One draft – which would later gain much publicity – said Mr Purcell was being treated for a “chemical dependency”. Another draft referred to “drink and drugs”.

Finally Mr Purcell agreed to a public reference to “drink and previous use of drugs”, with the statement going out in Mr Coleman’s name. He also agreed to quit.

Then the unexpected happened.

Mr Purcell told his council team to share the agreed statement with Peter Watson, a litigation expert at the Glasgow law firm Levy & McRae. When Mr Watson saw it, he refused to agree to it, and offered a bowdlerised version referring merely to a leave of absence on medical advice. Mr Coleman, who recognised the need for candour, refused to put his name to it.

Later on the Monday night, Mr Purcell called a senior aide and asked to meet him in Glasgow with Mr Watson and crisis PR guru Jack Irvine, a former tabloid newspaper editor and the founder of the public-relations company Media House. Opposed to how Mr Watson and Mr Irvine were carving him out of the picture, the aide refused, even threatening a constructive dismissal action.

The meeting never took place and Mr Purcell remained in Castle Craig, but it was already too late to keep the story under wraps. Late in the afternoon, all Labour councillors had been told to report for a special meeting at 10am on Tuesday to hear about Mr Purcell’s future, and by early evening the story was beginning to seep out.

By late on Monday night, The Herald had the story that Mr Purcell would step down the next day. The following morning set the bizarre tone for the rest of the week’s coverage.

At their meeting, the Labour group were told by Mr Edgar that Mr Purcell had resigned and press queries were to be passed to Mr Irvine at Media House. There was no discussion of the exact nature of Mr Purcell’s problems, just that “stress and exhaustion” were involved.

Mr Purcell’s decision to use crisis specialists like Mr Irvine and Mr Watson was a forlorn move. It immediately red-flagged the story, telling every journalist in Scotland that something was not right.

One friend put the decision down to drug-induced paranoia.

Still, for a few hours at least, the plan seemed to be working. Mr Watson’s reputation and Mr Irvine’s media reach kept the facts under wraps. “Earlier this morning Steven made the effort to telephone his resignation as leader of Glasgow City Council,” their statement said.

“Steven does this with a heavy heart but the strain of running one of the UK’s largest authorities combined with the added pressures of the Commonwealth Games planning and the controversy over Strathclyde Partnership for Transport (SPT) has just proved too much for a man who lived and breathed Glasgow 24 hours a day.”

But most of the reporting was sceptical, peppered with talk of riddles and mysteries, and highlighted that the presence of Mr Irvine and Mr Watson hinted that there was something darker afoot.

By Wednesday morning, the Media House strategy began unravelling, as one paper revealed Mr Purcell had gone to Castle Craig. By mid-morning Mr Irvine was forced to put out a statement confirming Mr Purcell had been at the clinic, but that he had now left. “Councillor Purcell is recuperating with family and he asks the media to allow him time and space to recover to full health,” the statement pleaded in vain.

Each day brought a new twist. Mr Purcell’s disappearance from Castle Craig leaked out – although not the possible suicide attempt – and then one of its consultants said the councillor had not been treated for a drug problem.

The internet, including the Guido Fawkes website beloved of the political classes, was also buzzing with jokes about Mr Purcell and cocaine.

On Friday, the first, hazy reporting of the SCDEA angle emerged. Then, in a grim twist, one of Mr Purcell’s political acolytes collapsed at the City Chambers and died from a heart attack. Danus McKinlay, who was being groomed as a Labour council candidate, was only 18.

Two hours later, Mr Purcell announced he was resigning from the council completely. After four days of trying in vain to use fiction to save his political career, he was overwhelmed by facts and gave in to reality.

Lord Advocate’s lawyers Levy & McRae tried to block media reporting over Glasgow Council Chief resignation as details unravel of clinic escapade

Steven Purcell, former leader of Glasgow City Council. The recent turmoil of Glasgow City Council, which saw the resignation late last week by its leader, Steven Purcell has taken a new twist as Mr Purcell’s lawyers, Levy & McRae, now appear to be targeting the media in an attempt to prevent further reporting on Mr Purcell’s situation and the facts surrounding his resignation from Glasgow City Council, facts which only now are coming to light after furious attempts by the law firm to gag the City Council itself and news organisations investigating the affair.

Lord Advocate tried similar Press Complaint move over abuse story. Levy & McRae, who were hired by Mr Purcell, have apparently filed complaints with the Press Complaints Commission according to BBC News, of what they say is "harassment of a sick man". Levy & McRae are known to have used the same tactic of making complaints to the PCC in similar crisis management stories, to dissuade newspapers from further investigations into scandals affecting their clients, notably most recently performing a similar tactical complaint to the PCC on behalf of the Lord Advocate, Elish Angiolini, over allegations connected with the recent & continuing controversy over the arrest of journalist & broadcaster Robert Green, who had been investigating allegations of abuse made by downs syndrome girl Hollie Greig against high profile members of Scotland’s legal establishment.

During Scottish Law Reporter’s investigations into the way in which Levy & McRae censored media reporting of Hollie Greig’s claims of abuse, it came to light the law firm also had strong ties to the current Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill, who had once worked at Levy & McRae. It also came to light the law firm represented not only the Lord Advocate Ms Agniolini, but also others connected with allegations made by Ms Greig, notably a serving Sheriff, who used the law firm to obtain an interdict censoring further reporting on Ms Greig's case which contributed to the journalist Mr Green’s arrest in Aberdeen, reported earlier HERE

Mr Purcell, who is reported to have attended Borders based Castle Craig Hospital, which specialises in treatment for alcohol & drug addiction, also hired PR Company, Media House, which specialises in ‘crisis management’. Clearly the crisis is not being handled very well, as the story of what happened now appears to be unravelling, according to Scottish Television’s latest report : Steven Purcell went missing from private clinic.

(This story and its many headlines should serve as a lesson in who not to employ for legal stage management of news, however we wish Mr Purcell a speedy recovery from his current personal circumstances - Ed)

BBC News reports :

Council planned Purcell 'chemical dependency' statement

Glasgow City Council officials had been set to say that former leader Steven Purcell quit because of a "chemical dependency", it has emerged.

Mr Purcell resigned on Tuesday citing exhaustion caused by the burden of his responsibilities. The council statement was abandoned after officials agreed with Mr Purcell's lawyers that they should not mention his personal issues.

His spokesman said claims of a chemical dependency were without foundation. He added that the issue was now in the hands of Mr Purcell's legal team.

The 37-year-old is recovering after being treated at a rehabilitation clinic in the Borders at the weekend. Castle Craig Hospital describes itself as "one of Europe's top rehab clinics" and provides inpatient treatment for those suffering from alcohol and drug addiction.

It became apparent over the weekend that Mr Purcell would be standing down as leader of Glasgow City Council. An official announcement of his resignation was made at a meeting of the Labour group on Tuesday morning. A PR firm appointed by Mr Purcell issued a statement on Wednesday saying the former council leader was recuperating with family, and asking the media to allow him time and space to recover to full health.

It has since emerged that lawyers acting for Mr Purcell have complained to the Press Complaints Commission about what they said was "harassment of a sick man".

The former council leader's advisers said he was suffering from exhaustion and cited stress over the preparations for the Commonwealth Games and troubles at Strathclyde Partnership for Transport (SPT) among the reasons for his departure.

Proceedings to choose a new leader will begin later in the year, probably after a general election. Until then, the role will be filled by Mr Purcell's former deputy, Councillor Jim Coleman.

Scottish Parliament MSPs urged to back regulation of property factors

David Whitton MSP. Strathkelvin and Bearsden MSP David Whitton has urged the regional MSPs to back proposals by Patricia Ferguson MSP members’ bill at Holyrood which would give homeowners more protection by enforcing new standards of registration and accreditation on factors and property managers in Scotland. The proposals come after the Office of Fair Trading published a report finding significant problems in Scotland’s property management market.

The consultation paper for the proposals to require property factors to register and make provision for an accessible form of dispute resolution between homeowners and property factors can be viewed HERE (pdf). Notable support comes from a range of organisations including the Property Managers Association and Govan Law Centre. The OFT’s full report download : Property managers in Scotland - a market study (pdf)

David Whitton MSP said: “For too long factors have been a law unto themselves. There are many good factors but there are others who seem to see the job as a licence to print money and simply do not communicate with the people they are supposed to work for. I hope that MSPs from across the Chamber will put aside their differences and support proposals to give homeowners more rights.”

The current proposals from the Scottish Government which are simply a voluntary code, may wind up as most voluntary codes go – ineffective and requiring statutory legislation further down the line.

Mr Whitton, commenting on the Scottish Government’s voluntary idea of regulation, said : "The Scottish Government is currently proposing a voluntary scheme but we believe they need to go further and that legislation is required."

The consultation paper for Patricia Ferguson’s bill to require property factors to register and make provision for an accessible form of dispute resolution between homeowners and property factors can be viewed HERE (pdf). Notable support comes from a range of organisations including the Property Managers Association and Govan Law Centre.

Patricia Ferguson MSP launches Bill to regulate property factors

S3M-5872 Patricia Ferguson: Factoring Services : That the Parliament notes that the Office of Fair Trading market study into the property management market found that the market is not working well for consumers in Scotland; welcomes the recent cross-party support for proposals to require property factors to register and to make provision for an accessible form of dispute resolution between homeowners and property factors, and further welcomes this positive progress toward the introduction of legislation to ensure better accountability of property managers for their standards and the services that they provide.

Solicitors from Glasgow law firm HBJ Gateley Wareing accused in da Vinci 'Madonna with the Yarnwinder' £4million extortion plot

A cautionary tale of paintings floating around the offices of lawyers, in this particular case, the offices of HBJ Gateley Wareing in Glasgow is told in recent headlines over the now recovered Leonardo da Vinci painting, the Madonna with the Yarnwinder, stolen from the Duke of Bucchleuch’s Drumlanrig castle, near Dumfries in August 2003 in a daylight robbery. Several solicitors are accused of being involved in the alleged £4million extortion plot …

The Guardian reports :

The great Leonardo da Vinci heist: solicitor accused of £4m extortion plot

• Five on trial over threat to destroy £50m masterpiece
• Theft from duke's castle remains Britain's biggest

By Severin Carrell
guardian.co.uk, Monday 1 March 2010

A solicitor has been accused along with four other men of threatening to destroy a stolen Leonardo da Vinci masterpiece unless they were paid £4.25m, in a conspiracy allegedly hatched in the offices of one of Glasgow's leading law firms.

Marshall Ronald, 53, a lawyer from Skelmersdale, Lancashire, has gone on trial for allegedly helping to organise a plot to extort the money from the Duke of Buccleuch for the safe return of Leonardo's Madonna of the Yarnwinder.

The high court in Edinburgh was told today that the conspiracy was organised with the help of two co-accused from Glasgow and two other men from Ormskirk, Lancashire.

The five alleged conspirators are accused of trying to extort £4.25m from the duke and his son Richard, the 10th and current duke, by "menacing them" and "putting them in a state of fear and alarm and apprehension" that the painting would be damaged or destroyed if the ransom was not paid.

Valued at £30m to £50m, the painting was the centrepiece of the then duke's collection at Drumlanrig castle, near Dumfries, reputed to be the UK's most valuable collection in private hands, when it was stolen in August 2003 in a daylight robbery. The heist remains the UK's biggest art theft.

The painting was recovered in October 2007 after police raided the offices of the law firm, HBJ Gateley Wareing, in Glasgow. The duke, a keen fine art collector, had died aged 83 a month before it was recovered.

The court was told that the two alleged thieves, not among the five men on trial, had threatened to kill a young tour guide and brandished an axe at other staff when they took the painting from its protective case.

The casually-dressed men had been posing as tourists, and escaped through a window at Drumlanrig castle, the ancestral home of the dukes of Buccleuch, carrying the Leonardo under their arms.

Alison Russell, then an 18-year-old who had just begun her first season as a tour guide, told the court the two men were the first visitors to arrive at the gallery housing the painting, immediately after the castle opened one morning in late August 2003.They had ignored all the castle's other galleries and her attempt to describe the collection.

Then, she told the court, one of the thieves "put his hand over my mouth and told me I had to lie down on the ground or he would kill me if I didn't".

Sarah Skene, 73, another tour guide, said she heard "a commotion" in the staircase hall housing the painting, and heard a male colleague shouting "please don't do it. Retreat, retreat."

She came in and saw one of the thieves wielding the axe. "He was standing guard on the picture," she said. "After it was done, they disappeared out of the window."

The jury was shown two CCTV images showing the thieves: a thick-set man wearing a white sunhat and a gilet-style waistcoat, and a slimmer man with a baseball cap and dark-coloured casual jacket. Both men walked under the CCTV camera with their faces obscured by their hats.

Currently in the National Gallery of Scotland in Edinburgh on temporary loan, the painting, which measures 20in x 14in, shows the Madonna with the infant Jesus and the cross-shaped yarnwinder, a symbol of Christ's crucifixion.

The prosecution claims that in July 2007, nearly four years after the theft, Ronald, the solicitor, had contacted the duke's insurers and their loss adjusters and claimed he could arrange for the painting's return. He allegedly told two undercover police officers posing as the duke's representatives that "volatile individuals" were involved who would "do something very silly" if the police were informed.

Between 10 August 2007 and 4 October 2007, Ronald repeatedly asked the detectives to pay £2m into his own solicitor's firm's account and another £2.25m into a Swiss bank account, the charges said.

During those weeks, Ronald and two co-defendants, Calum Jones, 45, and David Boyce, 63, drafted an agreement at the offices of HBJ Gateley Wareing to organise the safe return of the Leonardo, once the £2m had been paid to Ronald's firm.

The charges allege that in late September and early October 2007, Ronald embezzled £500,000 from his clients' accounts and arranged to take possession of the painting, from persons unknown.

On 29 September, Ronald bought acid-free paper and a folio case, allegedly to transport the painting. Four days later, he allegedly paid £350,000 to another of his co-accused, a builder from Ormskirk called Robert Graham, 57, for the painting.

With the last defendant, John Doyle, 61, also from Ormskirk, Ronald and Graham allegedly took possession of the stolen painting – an offence similar to receiving stolen goods known as "reset" in Scots law – and then took it to Jones and Boyce at their offices in Glasgow.

On 4 October, they allegedly showed the paintings to the two undercover detectives, who were known to them as David Restor and John Craig, demanding a total of £4.25m payable in two large sums for its safe return.

The trial continues and is expected to last for up to six weeks