Talk:Patrick McGuire (solicitor)

This article was nominated for deletion on 31 December 2021. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This page was proposed for deletion by Tagishsimon (talk · contribs) on 1 December 2021.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles Law Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Scotland Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The WP:COIRESPONSE . ShimsCabot (talk · contribs) has been paid by BORN Thinking (a media agency) on behalf of Thompsons Solicitors Scotland. COI declared at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:ShimsCabot.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Patrick McGuire (solicitor). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071025031113/http://www.justice.gov.uk/docs/manslaughterhomicideact07.pdf to http://www.justice.gov.uk/docs/manslaughterhomicideact07.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

This message was posted before February 2018.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:51, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User ShimsCabot has admitted that his edits were made as part of his employment with a media agency on behalf of Thompsons Solicitors Scotland. [1] Greyjoy ^talk 08:28, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wikipedia editors,

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

The image https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Patrick_McGuire_4745.jpg now has the appropriate permissions from Paul Hunter, the owner/creator of the work. I would like to request the image be added to the top of the page. ShimsCabot (talk) 09:17, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ShimsCabot: You may add this image yourself. I suggest, however, that you crop the image to only include McGuire's body because it will be difficult to see the subject otherwise. Z1720 (talk) 17:50, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720: Thank you, I have added the original thumbnail and will add a cropped version as soon as I can. ShimsCabot (talk) 09:11, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

• What I think should be changed: Additions to Notable Cases section as follows:
• McFarlane v Scottish Borders Council involved a road worker who was building a passing place but suffered injury when his vehicle rolled down a steep embankment. The case tested the parameters of the Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996 and the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998.^[1]

• McGowan v W & JR Watson involved a band saw operating accident in which the claimant injured his hand. The defender's position was that the guard was functioning as it should have been, but Patrick argued that the regulations state dangerous parts must be guarded and there was strict liability in this regard.^[2]

These cases went to the Scottish appeal court, the Inner House of the Court of Session, and established that employers must do everything that is reasonably practicable to avoid risk and to safeguard employees. McGowan was notable as a prima facie case, whereby the employer had to prove they did everything possible to keep their employee safe. Patrick demonstrated to the court that the employer did not and therefore the appeal was upheld.^[3]

In McFarlane, the judge in the first instance dismissed the claim and found the claimant to be 75% negligent. At the Inner House, the court upheld the appeal and 'interfered' with the contributory negligence ruling, reducing this factor to 25%. This was significant as typically the Inner House takes the first instance ruling as 'matter of fact', however, Patrick demonstrated the flawed nature of the initial ruling.^[4]

• Why it should be changed:

These two additional notable cases tested various health and safety legislations and progressed the understanding of how they may be applied. The cases paved the way for greater worker safety and access to justice. The supporting text underneath explains Patricks role in the outcomes of the cases

• References supporting the possible change:

ShimsCabot (talk) 16:10, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Heartmusic678 (talk) 14:27, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Tagishsimon

You have proposed that Patrick McGuire's article be deleted. However, the content which was stripped out recently (in October/November) was the type of content you are now asking for. I have disclosed all my connections to Thompsons Solicitors and respectfully request that the page be left in place until my edit requests are accepted. I will today add content to my Sandbox in respect of Patrick's page, in which there are many news articles and neutral third party sources. The current page is an outdated version which I had nothing to do with and I am aiming to make the page better. Patrick McGuire is a highly regarded lawyer, and campaigner for civil rights and access to justice. ShimsCabot (talk) 09:00, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

" the content which was stripped out recently (in October/November) was the type of content you are now asking for." No. We all have access to diffs. The hagiographic content removed in October does not support a claim to notability. Within it were only two cites about McGuire; one, a fluff piece in the Herald - https://www.heraldscotland.com/business_hq/15661677.thompsons-partner-mcguire-job-much-just-law/ and the other a routine column filler in Scottish Legal News - https://www.scottishlegal.com/article/lawyer-of-the-month-patrick-mcguire

You are not aiming to make the page better. You are aiming to earn your 30 pieces of silver. You are responsible for the farrago of nonsense which was removed in October - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Patrick_McGuire_%28solicitor%29&type=revision&diff=1052173230&oldid=1052082378 ... your contribution speaks for itself. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:09, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tagishsimon I will be working on the page in my Sandbox today. When I am finished I will put the details on Patrick McGuire's Talk page. Please see my COI disclosures in terms of my paid work for BORN Thinking. ShimsCabot (talk) 10:27, 2 December 2021 (UTC).[reply]

I would like to object to the deletion of Patrick McGuire's page. I have provided updated content in my Sandbox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ShimsCabot/sandbox in respect of Patrick's work in the field of mass wrongs, group action litigation, campaigning and other work which is notable. I have provided sources and references to prove reliable, significant coverage of his achievements in seeking justice for groups of people (individuals) and in changing the Scottish justice system to benefit those who have suffered due to other parties' negligence or wrongdoing. I have attempted, to the best of my ability, to keep the text neutral and encyclopaedic

Patrick has worked on some of the most high-profile cases in Scottish legal history, and current litigation he is working on, such as the historical child abuse claims and VW NOx emissions claim, are likely to set legal precedents when they are ruled upon.

One of the comments about the current page content is that it is a routine CV of a personal injury solicitor's work, however, the notable cases included (and those previously added but deleted) all set legal precedents for how UK Health and Safety laws can be applied. The judgments in these cases have meant greater access to justice, fairer compensation and safer work places for individuals and it is this that makes them notable. It would be beneficial to include them on the page but sadly not all were covered in the press so the references consisted mainly of court documents and PDFs of court judgments. In the interests of verifiability I have not included the Notable Cases section in the latest content.

I respectfully ask that the page is not deleted and the content in my Sandbox is uploaded to the page. I welcome any advice and am happy to discuss the article. ShimsCabot (talk) 16:48, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Post Script - The PROD tag says "You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to deletion for any reason." As an editor with a COI, I have upheld my declaration that I will not add to or edit Patrick McGuire's page directly and so I have left the tag in place. ShimsCabot (talk) 15:43, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have not demonstrated that this person is notable in terms of

WP:N. Were he the legal behemoth of your description, we would expect to find media pieces about him, much as we do for people like Michael Mansfield. Right now we have one fluff piece, one very routine column-filler, and your COI opinion that the cases he works on are somehow so amazing that he inherits notability. I continue to think that deletion is the correct way to go for this article. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:17, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Adding new "Campaigning" section - COI edit request

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined.

• What I think should be changed: Addition of new section

Campaigning -

Patrick has given evidence to Scottish Parliamentary committees on numerous matters including Culpable Homicide[1], the Damages (Investment Returns and Periodical Payments) (Scotland) Bill^[2], the Economic Impact of leaving the European Union^[3], the Living Wage^[4], and Health and Safety in Scotland^[5].

Patrick has lobbied for various changes in the law, including certain sections of the Court Reform Scotland Act 2014, particularly the elements relating to sanction for counsel (when parties should be allowed to have legal representation involved) and that all work-related cases, irrespective of value, should be heard in the All Scotland Personal Injury Court.^[6]

In 2014, Patrick campaigned for a review of the civil justice system in Scotland^[7] and reform of Scotland’s Fatal Accident Inquiry system^[8]. The Inquiries into Fatal Accidents and Sudden Deaths etc. (Scotland) Act 2016 gained Royal assent and passed into law on 14 January 2016, however, Patrick argues that the reforms did not go far enough. During Thompsons' representation of some of the bereaved families in the Clutha bar helicopter disaster he said that “real, progressive change [in fatal accident inquiry procedure] was not a priority for the Government”, adding that it wanted to be “all things to all people” and “didn’t do much to oppose big business and the big insurance companies”.^[9]

He also gave evidence to the 2020 Justice Committee in relation to the Culpable Homicide (Scotland) Bill. The Bill proposed an amendment to the law relating to culpable homicide to ensure that when loss of life is caused by the recklessness or gross negligence of individuals, companies or organisations, the wrongdoer, when proven, can be convicted of the offence that reflects the appropriate seriousness and moral opprobrium of what occurred.^[10]

In 2021, as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic and the launching of a Scottish public inquiry into how the public health emergency was handled in Scotland, Patrick wrote an open letter to Deputy First Minister John Swinney calling on him to ensure that the terms of reference for the Covid inquiry would give it the necessary powers to provide justice for those who had suffered.^[11]

• Why it should be changed:

This content shows Patrick McGuire's work in respect of campaigning for judicial reform and on behalf of parties who are seeking justice. It is over and above the work he carries out as a solicitor advocate and evidences his influence and notability amongst government and law makers in Scotland.

• References supporting the possible change:

ShimsCabot (talk) 08:26, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Declined. The article is promotional enough as is without adding another resume section with pull quotes. GeneralNotability (talk) 00:12, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

• What I think should be changed and why

The following proposed sections for Patrick McGuire's page provide more information and sources in respect of his work and notability in the field of Scottish Law and Justice.

Patrick works on behalf of groups of people who have collectively experienced wrongs and injustices. He has spent much of his later legal career working on public inquiries and mass litigations as noted below.^[1]

Public inquiries

In 2005, Patrick campaigned for a full public inquiry to be set up into the Stockline Plastics factory explosion^[2][3]. He worked with the families of those killed and injured, and alongside Patricia Ferguson (former MSP, Glasgow Maryhill), Ann McKechin (former MP, Glasgow Maryhill) and with the Scottish Trades Union Congress. Out of the six public inquiries which have taken place in Scotland up to 2021, Patrick has been the Recognised Legal Representative in four:

• Stockline /ICL Joint Public Inquiry^[4][5] (commenced 2004)
• The Penrose Inquiry (infected blood products causing Hepatitis C and HIV)^[6][7] (commenced 2009)
• The Vale of Leven Hospital Public Inquiry (C-difficile)^[8] (commenced 2009)
• The Scottish Hospitals Inquiry (ongoing – Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow and Royal Hospital for Children and Young People, Edinburgh)^[9] (commenced 2020)

In the Vale of Leven Public Inquiry he worked closely with family groups and Jackie Baillie (MSP). Throughout the Penrose Inquiry, and onwards into the Infected Blood Inquiry, he worked closely with the Haemophilia Society^[10].

Infected blood inquiry

Patrick is the Recognised Legal Representative to more than 300 Core Participants at the Infected Blood Inquiry which commenced in 2018, three years after the conclusion of the Penrose Inquiry in Scotland.

While Penrose was the first statutory inquiry, its powers and terms of reference were limited. The subsequent Infected Blood Inquiry is a UK-wide investigation which will also re-examine what happened to patients in Scotland who were infected with Hepatitis C and HIV through contaminated blood products. Patrick served on the Contaminated Blood Financial Review Group^[11] which resulted in a significantly increased financial support package for victims of the contaminated blood scandal through the newly created Scottish Infected Blood Support Scheme (SIBSS)^[12]

Mass litigation

Patrick campaigns on issues relating to the rights of victims of accidents and disease and has represented mass litigants in the following issues:

• PiP breast implants^[13][14]
• DePuy hip replacements^[15]
• Cyclists injured as a result of Edinburgh's tram works^[16][17]
• Edinburgh City Council’s handling of baby ashes at MortonHall Crematorium ^[18][19](which has subsequently led to claims throughout Scotland.^[20])
• Vaginal mesh implants^[21]
• Clutha public house helicopter crash^[22]

Scotland's first Group Proceedings Litigation – Volkswagen emissions claims

Following the introduction of the Civil Litigation (Expenses and Group Proceedings) (Scotland) Act 2018, Patrick lobbied the Scottish Civil Justice Council for the introduction of Rules relating to group actions.^[23] The new Rules under the Act came into force in August 2021 and introduced the statutory framework for formal group actions to be heard in Scotland. Such actions mean that groups of claimants, all suffering the same wrong, can act as one group, thereby streamlining the litigation process.

Under the Act, Patrick was the first solicitor in Scotland to bring a 'class-style' group action claim to court – he is lead solicitor in the VW NOx Emissions claim in which Thompsons is representing more than 2,000 claimants.^[24]

Work with survivors of historical child abuse

From 2015, Patrick began working with survivors of historical child abuse.

In May 2017 the first hearing in the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry heard apologies from more than 60 organisations which had run children's homes and institutions across Scotland including Quarrier's, Daughters of Charity of St Vincent de Paul, Sisters of Nazareth, Good Shepherd Sisters, De La Salle Brothers and Christian Brothers. Patrick attended the hearing and was pictured with survivors who had gathered for a vigil outside Rosebery House before the inquiry started.^[25]

On 4 October 2017, the time bar preventing survivors of historic abuse from taking civil legal action against the perpetrators was lifted. Patrick and the Survivors Team from Thompsons Solicitors Scotland are now in the process of representing survivors of child abuse across Scotland and from a number of different settings. The team represented survivors who were abused by

In 2022, Lord Arthurson granted 22 former Celtic Boys Club players the right to launch a group action lawsuit against Celtic FC in respect of the historical child abuse. Patrick McGuire and Thompsons Solicitors in Scotland are representing the survivors. He told the Glasgow Times that this was a "watershed moment".[29] The news of the group action claim saw more former Celtic Boys Club players to come forward to tell of the abuse they suffered in the past.^[30]

In 2005, Patrick's work with

Patrick is on the Board of Directors for Wellbeing Scotland and fully supports the Charity's work.[33]

As a campaigning lawyer, Patrick has supported Scottish Hazards in their work seeking justice for bereaved families whose loved ones died in occupational accidents.^[34]

He also supports and works with Show Racism the Red Card^[35] and is a Treasurer/Trustee/Director of Bo'ness United JFC (Bo'ness Athletic Football Club).^[36]

I made most of the edits recommended under trade unions and charity work. Much of the other edit requests are written like a resume or public relations piece. Other editors are encouraged to take a look and give further consideration to these or similar edits. I would also recommend independent editors review the entire article under the same pretense. The article could use a good review to better comply with

WP:NPOV standards. Go4thProsper (talk) 22:12, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Having not heard any objections from other editors in the months since the prior edit discussion, I have also added the cases discussed and suggested in the mass wrongs section. As with my other previous edits incorporated from the edit request, other interested editors are encouraged to review these edits and weigh in with opinions. I will not object if other editors decide these additions should be trimmed or removed altogether. Go4thProsper (talk) 03:19, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Lawyer of the Month May 2020 – Scottish Legal News^[37]
• Legal Personality of the Year 2014 – Scottish Legal Awards^[38]

• References supporting the possible change:

ShimsCabot (talk) 10:10, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

Dear editors,

In respect of the orphan tag on Patrick McGuire's page - I added an edit request on the Penrose Inquiry Talk Page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Penrose_Inquiry on 8 September 2022. The Penrose Inquiry page mentions the solicitor for the Inquiry, but not the solicitor for victims. Patrick McGuire represented Haemophilia Scotland and the Scottish Infected Blood Forum at the Inquiry and was the recognised legal representative for those affected by infected blood.

I have included references for these statements on my COI request and other proposed edits (one of which has already been added to the page). If this information is added to the Penrose Inquiry page, a link could be placed to Patrick McGuire's page and the issue of it being an orphan page would be resolved. I look forward to any advice or assistance you can give. ShimsCabot (talk) 08:42, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done If/when the link is made at Penrose Inquiry, you can reopen this request. Z1720 (talk) 18:21, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]