Gym operator granted decree of absolvitor after Sheriff Appeal Court allows appeal against damages award

By Mitchell Skilling

Pursuer Jack McCormack was awarded £6,881.95 by the sheriff in his action against defender and appellant Sportsdirect.com Fitness Ltd, which operated the Everlast Fitness Club at Glasgow Fort. The appellant argued that the sheriff had insufficient evidence to find it had been negligent, and erred in applying the maxim of res ipsa loquitur.

The appeal was heard by Sheriff Principal Kate Dowdalls KC with Appeal Sheriffs Robert Fife and Christopher Shead. Pugh KC and Hennessey, solicitor advocate, appeared for the appellant and Khurana KC and Calderwood, solicitor advocate, for the respondent.

Ragged edge

The respondent, along with his friend, Mr McAlister, went to the appellant’s gym on 5 November 2021. They decided to use a shoulder press machine during their workout. Before commencing the exercise they began loading weight plates onto the machine. As the respondent did this, he immediately felt pain in his left hand. It transpired that he had suffered a cut to the ring finger and palm of his left hand, although he was unsure how he had been injured. After the accident, Mr McAlister checked the weight plate and noticed a ragged edge on its outer rim.

Evidence was also given by Mr Rashid, an employee of the appellant, who stated that the plate and other equipment in the gym had been inspected that morning. However, the sheriff found that res ipsa loquitur applied, that the appellant had exclusive control over the premises, and that the appellant had not demonstrated that the accident occurred without fault on its part.

Senior counsel for the appellant submitted that the sheriff had not made a finding that the ragged edge as described by the sheriff amounted to a defect and was visible before the accident. Absent any finding as to the extent of the defect, he could have found that the hazard it created was reasonably foreseeable to the appellant. Additionally, non-negligent causes were possible, including damage in ordinary usage by a member of the gym, over whom the appellant had no control.

For the respondent it was submitted that there was no basis to interfere with the sheriff’s findings in fact, on the basis of which he was entitled to hold that res ipsa loquitur applied. Had the appellant made sufficient averments of a reasonable system of inspection and maintenance, they could have led evidence regarding the same to displace the operation of the maxim.

Question of control

Delivering the opinion of the court, Sheriff Principal Dowdalls said of what the sheriff was required to do: “We understood the respondent to accept that for [res ipsa loquitur] to apply it was necessary for the appellant to have exercised exclusive management and control over the thing which caused the injury: the weight plate. It was acknowledged that the sheriff had not made an express finding to that effect but, it was argued, such a finding had been made by necessary implication. Accordingly, it was accepted that the focus for the sheriff should have been on the question of control over the weight plate, not merely on control over the premises.”

She continued: “The starting point is that the sheriff did not address the question of control over the weight plate in his note or findings. He did not consider that it was necessary to do so.  Given the decisions to which we were referred and particularly the decision of the Inner House in McDyer v Celtic Football and Athletic Co Ltd (2000) we are satisfied that the sheriff was bound to consider and decide this question.”

The Sheriff Principal concluded on this ground: “Each case is fact specific. The appellant operated a gym which was open to members of the public who paid a membership or subscription to use the facilities, including an area for the use of free weights and a number of shoulder press machines. In our view the appellant required to have exclusive control of the weight plate for the maxim to apply. Having regard to the dicta and circumstances in McDyer, in our view it cannot be said that the appellant had exclusive control of the weight plate.”

Considering the absence of findings on the condition of the plate, she added: “Had it been open to sheriff to apply the maxim he would have been entitled to conclude that the circumstances yielded a prima facie inference of negligence which it was then for the appellant to rebut. For the reasons given by the sheriff, which rested primarily on his assessment of the evidence, we consider he would have been entitled to reach the conclusion that the appellant had failed to rebut that inference and that accordingly the appellant had been negligent.”

The appeal was therefore allowed, with decree of absolvitor granted in favour of the appellant.

Court rules £1.04bn legal action against Google can proceed to trial

The case can now proceed to trial, with thousands of businesses poised to receive compensation for the loss in revenue suffered as a result of Google’s alleged conduct if the claim is successful.

The decision is the latest in a series of setbacks for the tech giant and follows significant scrutiny of its Play Store conduct around the world, including by the European Commission, the UK’s competition watchdog and the US courts.

The legal claim, brought by leading competition law academic Professor Barry Rodger, accuses Google of abusing its dominant position to the detriment of thousands of UK businesses who sold apps on the Play Store (or ‘Google Play’) to Android customers. 

The lawsuit seeks compensation for the losses in revenue suffered by those businesses, many of whom are SMEs, from August 2018 onwards.

The CAT has now published a collective proceedings order, confirming its decision to certify the claim, authorising Professor Rodger to act as the class representative and permitting the claim to proceed to trial. The trial is set to commence in October 2026.

Professor Rodger said: “The tribunal’s decision is a significant step towards ensuring redress for small businesses in the UK that have lost money through Google’s conduct. Google abuses its Play Store monopoly by imposing excessive commissions, harming small business app developers and stifling crucial innovation and growth in the UK tech landscape.”

Lib Dems call for compensation scheme to be opened to Fornethy survivors

The Scottish government’s Redress Scheme pays out up to £100,000 and offers support to those abused in residential care.

More than 200 women have now come forward alleging that they were sexually, physically and mentally abused in the 1960s and 70s at Fornethy House- an all-girls residential school in Angus.

The Holyrood Petitions Committee has concluded that the women should be granted access to the scheme.

In 2023, Mr Swinney said that there is no “inherent impediment to applications to the Redress Scheme coming forward from people who spent time at Fornethy” and that “the nature of the environment in which individuals were spending time at Fornethy could be considered to fall within the ambit of the scheme.”

However, the Scottish government has now told Fornethy survivors that they do not qualify for the Redress Scheme because their visit to the school was only “short-term”.

Mr Cole-Hamilton said: “The Scottish government’s continued denial of redress to the Fornethy House survivors is a palpable unfairness. This scheme is specifically designed to support victims of abuse, so it is galling that the Fornethy women are excluded from it.

“How can the length of time they spent at Fornethy possibly matter when they were abused while there and forced to bear the trauma of that abuse for the rest of their lives? These women should not have to fight such an uphill struggle for the recognition and compensation they deserve.

“The Scottish government has sent mixed messages to survivors, with the First Minister having once indicated they could be successful under the scheme, only for his Deputy First Minister to subsequently reject that notion.

“I am urging both he and the Deputy First Minister to look again at the Fornethy cases, do the right thing and grant these women access to Redress. It is the very least they deserve.”

Community council succeeds in Common Good case

The Square is Common Good and had been used by the community free of charge for years, it having been gifted to the then Burgh in the late 1960s. Free community events had regularly taken place at The Square, including local markets, and local cultural and festive events.

Notwithstanding this, the council resolved to go out to consultation on the proposed scheme. On conclusion of the consultation the council decided to approve the scheme and lodged the application for consent with the court under section 75(2) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973.

The Community Council instructed Duncan Swarbrick of Swarbrick Law, Aviemore, and Scott Blair, advocate, with Terra Firma Chambers, who prepared detailed defences to the application. Among other concerns, it was noted that the adoption of the scheme was not a course which followed the recommendation of council officers and an issue arose about the lack of reasons as to why that recommendation was not followed. Concern was also expressed about whether the consultation followed the requirements of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 and the statutory guidance relating to consultation.

Faced with the opposition of the Community Council, just ahead of the next calling of the case, the council announced it had decided to no longer proceed with the application. At that hearing on 4 June 2025, before Sheriff Eilidh McDonald, where she described the case as “difficult, complex and novel,” the Community Council sought expenses from the council and sanction for counsel. Although opposed by the council, the sheriff determined that it was competent to award expenses to a community council opposed to a Common Good application and went on to award expenses and sanction.

Duncan Swarbrick told Scottish Legal News that the case is of some importance.

He said: “Although the council did not formally concede that the concerns of the Community Council were justified, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that they recognised the force of the case against them.”

He added: “Whatever the merits of the case, the case has stressed the important role of a community council in opposing Common Good applications and the financial risk that the council runs if the application is not successful.”

Scottish Law Commission to hold hybrid conference

Entitled “Law Reform: Shaping Society”, the conference is a unique and timely opportunity to critically reflect on the value and challenges of law reform including the contributions the commission has made to law in a range of subjects such as family law, commercial law and property law.

The keynote speaker is Lord Hodge, Deputy President of the Supreme Court. He will be joined by Lady Wise, President of the Scottish Tribunals and Senator of the College of Justice; Dr Alisdair Macpherson, University of Aberdeen; and Professor James Lee, King’s College London.  

The conference will also give the commission an opportunity to celebrate its success during its first 60 years: around 82 per cent of its reports have been implemented in whole or in part. The commission has also successfully collaborated with the Law commission of England and Wales on a wide range of joint law reform projects. As a member of the Commonwealth Association of Law Reform Agencies (CALRAs), the commission has actively contributed to international capacity-building and learning from other bodies.

Chair of the commission, Lady Paton, said: “The commission has been at the forefront of law reform for 60 years. I am grateful to all those who have contributed, in particular commissioners, those working at the commission, and those who have worked with us in the past.

“As we look to the future, we want to meet the challenge of being a body fit to continue producing high quality law reform that meets the needs of a modern society.”

Opinion: ‘Too difficult’ or just too dangerous? The very real danger of coerced death under ‘assisted dying’ laws – part two

What about the fact that the bill will make coercion a criminal offence?

The McArthur Bill, like the Leadbeater Bill in England, would make it a specific offence to coerce or pressure another person into requesting assisted dying. But there would need to be grounds for suspecting coercion before anyone could be investigated or prosecuted for these offences, and we have just explained why suspicion is unlikely to be aroused even in many cases where coercion is actually present.

All of this must cast a different light on claims that “fears about coercion of vulnerable people are misguided” and that there is no evidence of coercion in jurisdictions that permit assisted dying. The review procedures in those states tend to be a paper exercise after the fact based on self-reporting by doctors, and those conducting the reviews tend to be supporters of assisted dying and strongly committed to the practice. The former Attorney General of Victoria, Australia, has characterised the system of review in his State as ‘hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil’. This is a common pattern in other jurisdictions. In Canada, the Office of the Chief Coroner identified over 400 potentially criminal breaches of the law or regulations on Medical Assistance in Dying, but did not refer any case to law enforcement.

In a rare case that was investigated by police in Oregon, Tami Sawyer was charged with criminally mistreating Thomas Middleton, a man who had come to live in her house, and made her a trustee of his finances, shortly before he ended his life under the Death with Dignity Act. After his death Sawyer sold the house, allegedly for $200,000, and transferred the money between a number of companies she owned. This came to light as part of a larger federal fraud investigation into Sawyer and her husband. However, despite the blatant criminal financial interest, there has been no investigation of whether Sawyer may have unduly influenced Middleton’s decision to die.

In the UK, Max Hill KC, a former director of public prosecutions, appeared at a news conference alongside Kim Leadbeater MP (the sponsor of the English equivalent of McArthur’s bill) earlier this year, where he stated: “There is really very little point in scrutinising, and looking for ‘bad cases’, after the death has occurred. What is the point of an investigation, even a prosecution, after someone has been coerced into ending their life?” It is astonishing to hear a former prosecutor question the value of investigating and prosecuting people following suspicious deaths, and it adds to the sense that the risks posed by assisted dying to vulnerable people are not being taken seriously enough by its supporters.

One of us highlighted in written evidence to the committee that scrutinised the McArthur Bill that although the bill mentions the risk of coercion by another person, it “ignores other forms of coercion that also matter: pressure exerted by society or social conditions, and pressure caused when a person internalises negative ideas about themself or their condition”. There is evidence from other jurisdictions of people choosing to die because of inadequate health or social care, or because they feel like a burden to others. This kind of internal coercion would be particularly difficult to prevent, or indeed detect.

The new crime of coercing someone to end their life would only address one form of coercion, and only in the unlikely event that it became visible to health professionals or others, and there was a will on the part of the authorities to take action.

If the Assisted Dying Bill becomes law, many Scots will come under external and/or internal coercion to end their lives. Lengthy waiting times for treatment (and particularly for accessing mental health services); NHS staff shortage; an underfunded and under-resourced social care sector, a national housing emergency; a palliative care sector reliant on charity; a benefits system that penalises those it should be supporting, including older adults and disabled people – any one of these would be a more appropriate use of parliamentary time and public attention than ‘assisted dying’. Scotland’s limited financial and resources and skilled workforce should be focused on assisting people to live.

Coerced deaths are inevitable

Opening the Stage 1 debate on the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill, its author, Liam McArthur, said that Holyrood “cannot continue to leave this issue in the ‘too difficult’ box”. Supporters of the current bill are clearly impatient to see legal change, but are in denial about the scale of the risk that vulnerable people will be coerced to die (which is only one of the risks posed by the bill, but surely the most serious). Indeed, assisted dying campaigners seem more concerned about the risk that family members might ‘coerce’ a loved one by trying to talk them out of ending their life (something most of us would regard as perfectly natural and relatable). Successive Scottish parliaments have been rightly reluctant to ‘open the box’ and release assisted dying into Scottish society, and our current MSPs should be similarly reluctant. Given the scale of abuse, the low rates of disclosure, and the fact that training, however thorough, cannot reliably detect coercion, it is inevitable that coerced deaths will result if the Assisted Dying Bill becomes law.

John Sturrock KC elected to International Academy of Mediators board

The board consists of members from around the globe, including Singapore, India, Hong Kong, England, the US, Canada, Kenya, Israel and France. 

Mr Sturrock, who was the first Scot to be nominated as a distinguished fellow of the IAM in 2009, said: “At this time of real uncertainty in the world, the role of mediators to help manage and resolve difficult conflicts and disputes has probably never been more important. 

“The IAM holds itself out as the premier global body for commercial mediators and, as such, it has much to do to continue to promote mediation and support mediators at local, national and international levels. I am honoured to play a part in IAM’s ongoing governance and development.”

Peter Krykant

Mr Krykant made headlines around the world when he refitted a van – and later an old ambulance – into a mobile “overdose prevention service” which he deployed on the streets of Glasgow without any kind of official permission.

The service he launched at the end of August 2020 to coincide with International Overdose Awareness Day, having raised funds through online crowdfunding, ran for around a year and supervised nearly 1,000 injections.

It was the first facility of its kind anywhere in the UK and, despite Police Scotland saying it was illegal to operate under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, Mr Krykant was never prosecuted in connection with the service.

His initiative was widely credited by drugs policy advocates with helping to break the impasse around the opening of official sites, long supported by the Scottish government and a number of local authorities but opposed by the Home Office.

In January this year, a pilot facility known as The Thistle opened on Glasgow’s Hunter Street after the Lord Advocate, Dorothy Bain KC, said it would not be in the public interest to prosecute people in possession of illegal drugs at the facility.

Mr Krykant welcomed its opening, while warning that it would not be enough in itself to tackle Scotland’s drug deaths emergency. He thought it was necessary to provide more access to alternatives to street drugs.

In his advocacy work, he drew on his personal experiences of drug use and homelessness, starting in his early teenage years. He spoke openly of how the stress of running the mobile service in Glasgow caused him to relapse.

Tributes were paid from across the political spectrum yesterday when Police Scotland confirmed that Mr Krykant had been found dead on Monday evening.

He was father to two boys, aged 14 and 10.

Cyber Security: You do a fire drill – so do a cyber attack drill

The attack on M&S has been branded a ‘wake up call’ by cabinet minister Pat McFadden, who rightly stated that “cyber security is not a luxury but an absolute necessity”.

I wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment, but it doesn’t mean all businesses (large or small) must spend millions on complex cyber security systems. When it comes to implementing robust cyber security practices, the ‘80/20 rule’ is a good yardstick – and the good news is that the 20 per cent refers to technology and IT systems.

The attacks have been operationally detrimental, impacting everything from online ordering and in-store experience, to the availability of meal deals and concerns over compromised data and reputational damage.

Businesses who want to robustly protect themselves, rather than footing a huge bill and incurring significant reputational damage should the worst happen, must look at organisational culture and management. Here are five things businesses can do to get the balance right when it comes to protecting against cyber attacks.

1. Never assume ‘it wouldn’t happen to us’…

Your first mistake is thinking your business isn’t ‘interesting’ to cyber criminals. Many attacks aren’t as targeted as you think – hackers often look for potentially lucrative ‘low hanging fruit’. If you hold data, you’re a potential target, and spending some time and effort up front to prepare could save legal headaches, money – and potentially your entire operation – in the long run.

2. Think about ‘when’ it’ll happen, not ‘if’ it’ll happen…

One of the most damaging allegations levelled at M&S has been a lack of business continuity planning. Worryingly, I suspect many organisations are in a similar boat. Would you be caught without a fire safety and evacuation plan? Of course not. And while the threat of a cyber attack may not be physical, it can do irreparable damage. Get a plan together, online and in hard copy – remember, if your system goes down, you need to access it to action it.

3. Treat it like a fire drill

Having a plan is all well and good, but the key personnel must be able to execute it seamlessly in the event of an attack. Map out potential vulnerabilities and rehearse for the worst-case scenario – sealing the breach, beginning recovery, assessing and planning the next steps, establishing reporting lines, containing the attack and mitigating the damage. Use the drills to investigate, analyse and learn lessons. Ensure the right people are involved too – CEOs, CTOs, legal, IT and communications at a minimum. Keeping them in the loop is vital in ensuring the right people are able to handle risky situations, should they arise. It only takes one person being in the dark on how to approach a crisis to potentially escalate things.

4. Create a culture of compliance

A culture of awareness and compliance cannot be underestimated when it comes to increasing protections. Your staff are likely to be your biggest vulnerability – responding to scam emails, sharing or writing down passwords, or failing to carry out software updates. There must be a top-down approach that starts with the board and senior management, with an emphasis on removing any ‘fear culture’ around making mistakes. Introduce phishing tests and make sure policies like GDPR are baked into everything you do – cyber security must be part of the business DNA, not an add-on. Cyber security is too important to leave to the IT Department – it’s everyone’s job.

5. Limit your liability

A huge part of the ‘management’ element is contract management. The legal side of cyber security cannot be left to chance – you must ensure clear, robust contracts with customers and suppliers. A business that fails to manage its contracts properly can get stuck in a risky position. Just like ‘piggy in the middle’, it could be fully liable for its customers – having to reimburse delayed or damaged items or compensate for compromised personal data – but only able to claim limited compensation from suppliers. The key is limiting your own liabilities while ensuring fair compensation for your own business. And review your contracts on a regular basis – in line with reviewing your vulnerabilities and updating your business continuity planning.

While some level of spend is required – on anti-virus, software updates and cyber insurance – people are crucial to protecting any business. Having the right culture, procedures, tools and contracts in place can significantly help to defend your company against cyber threats. But even with all the protection in the world, it’s unlikely businesses will be able to avoid them forever. The question isn’t if you’ll get hit – it’s when - and how badly? Having a robust training, skills and communications approach is the key to mitigating any damage. Cybersecurity should always be on the Board agenda, updated regularly, and embedded into the fabric of any business 24/7. Businesses might have a closing times, but hackers don’t.

Douglas McLachlan is a partner at Anderson Strathern LLP

New book surveys intellectual life of Neil MacCormick

Professor MacCormick (1941–2009) was one of the twentieth century’s most important legal philosophers and one of Scotland’s most influential public intellectuals.

Neil MacCormick: A Life in Politics, Philosophy, and Law by Professor Maksymilian Del Mar of Queen Mary University of London, tells the story of Professor MacCormick’s intensely political childhood as the son of ‘King John’, one of the founders of the Scottish National Party, through to his involvement in Scottish politics – especially as the author of the SNP’s constitutional policy – and his role as a member of the European Parliament, helping to draft the European Constitution. 

With special attention to his character, this book offers a reading of his entire oeuvre, covering his contributions to theories of legal and moral reasoning, institutional legal theory, nationalism, post-sovereignty, subsidiarity, and constitutional pluralism in Europe. 

SLN readers can save 20 per cent on the book with the code DELMAR25.

France: Tesla sued over Elon Musk’s ‘extreme right’ politics

Law firm GKA is representing 10 French clients with leases on Teslas who are seeking to have them terminated early by the Paris Commercial Court, France 24 reports.

Mr Musk was until recently a high-profile supporter of Donald Trump and controversially performed what appeared to be a Nazi salute at a rally celebrating his inauguration in January.

He was subsequently appointed by Trump as a senior adviser, leading the establishment of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which saw the pair frequently appear together in the media until he stepped down at the end of last month.

Outside of America, Mr Musk prominently threw his backing behind the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD), which Germany’s spy agency has since designated as a vehicle for right-wing extremism.

The lawsuit alleges that Mr Musk’s actions have turned Tesla-branded vehicles into “strong political symbols” and “veritable extreme-right ‘tokens’”, disappointing those who “acquired them with the sole aim of possessing an innovative and ecological vehicle”.

Cerebral Palsy Scotland partners with Slater and Gordon

Cerebral Palsy Scotland works with children, adults and whole families across the country to help them build skills, knowledge, confidence and relationships, enabling them to overcome barriers that may exist as a result of their condition.

To help sustain its vital services, Cerebral Palsy Scotland has secured new funding for its support work through a new partnership with Slater and Gordon. The law firm works widely with families across Scotland who live with Cerebral Palsy, and also is a longstanding partner of Cerebral Palsy Scotland’s sister charity in Wales, CP Cymru.

“Support services are absolutely vital for people living with Cerebral Palsy and our ambition is to help as many people as we possibly can,” said Stephanie Fraser, CEO of Cerebral Palsy Scotland.

She added: “Through this fantastic partnership with Slater and Gordon, we are able to sustain our support service, and will look to develop it further as we grow as a charity. The services families want and need continue to evolve, and we want to be in a position to deliver what they need.”

Derek Couper, head of clinical negligence in Scotland, said: “Cerebral Palsy Scotland plays an outstanding role in helping people across the country affected by the condition, and without them, tailored support would be very hard to come by.

“Their own research shows the struggle that people experience in finding the resources and understanding they need to navigate their lives – which makes the work of this charity absolutely invaluable.”

Morton Pacitti raises £1,780 for Will Aid

Morton Pacitti has raised a grand total of £12,450 since 2010. 

Linda A Pacitti, from the firm, said: “Will Aid is a fantastic initiative, and we’re thrilled to have helped so many people put their affairs in order while raising such a substantial amount for charity. It’s a real team effort, and we’re incredibly proud to have taken part once again this year.

“The team finds it a rewarding experience, and the money raised will help to make a real difference to people in need, both here at home and around the world.”

Quote of the day

You have to learn all the big ideas in the key disciplines in a way that they’re in a mental latticework in your head and you automatically use them for the rest of your life. If you do that, I solemnly promise you that one day you’ll be walking down the street and you’ll look to your right and left and you’ll think “my heavenly days, I’m now one of the few competent people in my whole age cohort.” If you don’t do it, many of the brightest of you will live in the middle ranks or in the shallows.

Charlie Munger, USC Law School Commencement Speech (13 May 2007)

And finally… taking the ball and going home

Vermont man Robert Lafayette sued the Burlington Free Press and two of its journalists, alleging that its coverage of high school sports was not “statewide” as advertised.

He complained that the Vermont Varsity Insider, a subsidiary of the newspaper which focuses on high school sports, rarely covered schools outside of Chittenden County, where many schools had an advertising relationship with it.

Mr Lafayette claimed that the alleged failure to feature his son’s performances during the 2024-25 season had hurt his college prospects and caused him stress, anxiety, gastrointestinal distress and panic attacks.

However, his claim for compensatory and punitive damages was rejected by a judge who said Vermont’s state constitution protects freedom of speech and freedom of the press, VTDigger reports.

The judge also noted that Mr Lafayette’s submissions had included fake case citations and quotes, which could lead to sanctions.

A final hearing on costs is to take place and the failed case could prove expensive for Mr Lafayette.

Economic disadvantage explored at Monday’s Family Conference

Lucia Clark from Morton Fraser MacRoberts will examine the impact of recent caselaw, while Dr Daniel Carter from Keith Carter and Associates will outline some of the approaches taken to provide a comprehensive and fair assessment of economic loss. Other topics covered during the conference will include the child’s right to be heard, arbitration theory and practice and the language of family law.

For more information on the conference chaired by SKO Family Law’s Alison Edmondson, and to book, click here.

The Family Conference forms part of the Scots Law Virtual Summer Series taking place online throughout June – for details of each of the individual conferences forming part of the Series, click here.

Denovo & First Scottish Launch Integration to Accelerate Property Search Efficiency

This collaboration marks a significant step forward for the Scottish legal sector, and we invite legal professionals to learn more about how this integration can optimise their practice. Read more to discover how this powerful partnership can transform your conveyancing process.

Are you a sole practitioner wishing things could be different?

Do you have a mountain to climb each day as a sole practitioner? Because as well as the legal work to do for your clients you have to deal with:

• Finance
• Compliance
• HR
• Technology
• Marketing
• General administration

Would you like less red tape and administration by having someone else do that for you?

Would you like more time to do law and earn fees by being able to concentrate on doing the legal work you love to do?

Plug and Play Law gives you more of the fees you generate; complete freedom of how, where and when you work; and allows you to focus on doing the legal work that you love to do.

If you are, a sole practitioner and wish things could be different then find out now if Plug & Play Law is the answer for you.

What is Plug & Play Law?

Plug & Play is a term coined by Mitch Kowalski in his book ‘The Great Legal Reformation: Notes from the Field’. A book that features Inksters.
Mitch Kowalski refers to Plug & Play Platforms when describing law firms such as Inksters who have developed a model where senior lawyers can work as a collective, with enhanced technology and back-office support.

Inksters and Plug & Play Law

Inksters is the foremost Plug & Play Law firm in Scotland. Specifically with, by far, the largest number of consultant solicitors and the greatest geographical reach. Inksters have operated and perfected this model for 12 years and been in business as a law firm for 26 years.

Inksters won both the Scottish and UK FSB awards in 2022 for self-employed / sole trader business of the year for this model that allows many legal sole practitioners to flourish.
Sole Practitioners retain their independence but with 9 added benefits

When a sole practitioner joins Inksters, they retain their independence as a self-employed solicitor / sole practitioner but with nine added benefits. You:

• Can just do law
• Have complete flexibility on your own terms
• Get the reward for what you do via a fee-share
• Reduce your costs
• Get all the benefits that a larger organisation can offer
• Become part of an award winning law firm
• Have access to a diverse range of clients
• Have the best technology to assist you
• Get Brian Inkster

Discover whether Plug & Play Law is the right fit for you

If you are, a sole practitioner and wish things could be different then complete the Plug & Play Law scorecard online. There are just 11 simple questions and it takes less than 60 seconds to complete. You will then receive an immediate personalised report on whether Plug & Play Law is a good fit for you.

Executry Software: Why Law Firms Face Delays and How Legal Case Management Software Can Help

Modern legal software with built-in executry management tools offers a clear path forward - streamlining processes, reducing burnout, and improving both operational efficiency and client service.

Read on to discover how the right case management system can help your firm meet growing demands and allow you to deliver a better service to grieving families .

Read the full blog here.

Ultimate Guide to Legal Workflow Automation for Law Firms

New technologies and modern workplace models transforming how firms operate. In fact, 81% of law firms plan to ramp up their use of legal automation tools - especially case management software - by 2026.

But what exactly is legal workflow automation? Why are some firms still hesitant to adopt it? And how can you ensure your firm gets it right?

In this article, we break down the biggest automation trends reshaping the legal world, explore which tasks your firm should be automating, and show how Denovo is helping firms boost productivity, accuracy, and profit.

Read the full article to discover how automation is shaping the future of legal practice - https://www.denovobi.com/blog/ultimate-guide-to-legal-workflow-automation-for-law-firms.