Kate Bennett

Year of Call 2014

"Kate remains calm in the face of a storm. An eloquent and persuasive advocate." -Legal 500 UK Bar 2023 

'A very hard working junior. She is very well organised and always up for the challenge to get the best outcome for her clients.'-Legal 500 UK Bar 2024

"Kate has an ability to deal with a huge volume of material. She gets through it in a timely manner and passes concise analysis to the senior. Her appetite for work is voracious." "Kate is always well organised, responsive, and provides clear and practical advice." - Chambers UK 2024

Kate has a busy and varied reparation practice with a particular emphasis on clinical negligence, disease and complex personal injury cases.  

She has a particular interest in clinical negligence and catastrophic cases. She regularly appears in the Court of Session and ASPIC.  She is also very experienced in conducting Fatal Accident Inquiries.

Kate is regularly instructed for both pursuers and defenders in all areas of personal injury litigation, including road traffic, employers and public liability as well as product liability cases. She is the Faculty of Advocates representative on the ASPIC Personal Injuries User Group.

Representative Cases

Norman Adamson v Highland Health Board [2022] EDIN 41
In this clinical negligence action, Kate represented the defenders who were successful following Proof.  The pursuer alleged negligence on the part of a urology nurse specialist and general surgeon in relation to his intravesical BCG treatment for bladder cancer, which he claimed caused him to develop BCG-osis (a rare complication).  The pursuer failed to prove his case on both breach of duty and causation.  

Cameron v Swan [2021] CSIH 30
The pursuer claimed damages for catastrophic injuries as a result of having been run over by the first defender. The Pursuer was lying in the road (at night) and intoxicated when the accident occurred. The first defender had not seen him.  A Proof proceeded on liability only in 2020.  The defenders had been ordained to lead at proof, the first defender having pled guilty to careless driving. The defenders were successful.   The Pursuer reclaimed against that decision. The Inner House held that the Lord Ordinary had erred in law by failing to apply the reverse onus correctly.  He had also failed to consider relevant evidence, had misunderstood the evidence of the principal witnesses, and had taken into account opinion evidence which ought to have been excluded as inadmissible.  Kate was instructed as Junior Counsel at both the Proof and the Reclaiming Motion.  

Agnes Mitchell v NHS Borders ASPIC, February 2020 unreported, (Sheriff Liddle)
Acted for defenders in employers liability claim.  Nurse claimed damages following assault by patient who suffered from dementia.  Defenders were successful at proof.

Lorna McGinlay or McLean & ors v Fairfield Shipbuilding and Anr [2019] CSOH 33 
Acted for one of the defenders in fatal claim arising from mesothelioma. Opposed motion for jury trial. Defenders argued that the pursuer’s right to jury trial was precluded by  section 22(4) of the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 

AH v Greater Glasgow Health Board, SR v Johnson & Johnson Medical Ltd, YT v Spire Healthcare Ltd, EN v Greater Glasgow Health Board 2018 SLT 535 
Debate on procedure roll. Acting as one of three junior counsel for pursuers in four lead cases arising out of use of vaginal mesh products.    

Kennedy v Mackenzie [2017] CSOH 118 
Acted as junior counsel for the defender in fatal claim arising from a road traffic accident.  The defender lost control of her car and as a result a passenger in the vehicle, died.  The defender failed to establish that her loss of control was caused by something other than her own negligence (the defender’s position was that the accident was caused by the condition of the road).

Dewar v Scottish Borders Council [2017] CSOH 68
Acted as junior counsel for pursuer who suffered severe injury following fall from his motorbike after it skidded on a damaged road surface.  The roads authority (defenders) were successful, the pursuer failed to prove that the damaged road surface constituted a significant hazard.

FAI Rachel Cassells [2017] FAI 12
Acted for the driver of a coach, which ran over Mrs Cassells in the car park at Trossachs Woollen Mill.

Contact Us

  • Compass Chambers
    Parliament House
    EH1 1RF