Roddy is an experienced litigator. His practice encompasses disputes about a range of executry, succession and trust issues including: commissary practice; executry administration; will interpretation; challenging testamentary writings; claims for cohabitants; legal rights; judicial factory administration; domicile; trustee liability and much more. Roddy regularly appears in a variety of courts throughout Scotland, including the Land Court.  He is a member of the The Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners (STEP).

Roddy was appointed Second Standing Junior to the Advocate General for Scotland in 2024 having been Standing Junior Counsel since 2018.

Testimonials

"Roddy MacLeod is technically very good and he is very good with clients too. " Chambers UK, 2026

"Roddy is approachable and keen to explore options with you to best suit the clients' needs. He is the best in his field with an impeccable knowledge in the area of contentious executries." Chambers UK, 2026

"Roddy is a recognised expert in the field of contentious succession, trust and executry disputes. His expert technical knowledge and practical approach to case strategies makes him a go-to advocate." Chambers UK, 2026

"Roddy is our go-to for contentious executry and trust work. He is technically excellent but also responsive, approachable and a delight to work with."
Chambers UK, 2026

"Roddy Macleod is absolutely brilliant. He was incredibly good with the client, knew what he was talking about and was very good on his feet." Chambers UK, 2025

'Roddy Macleod is a really strong advocate and has strong commercial awareness.' Chambers UK, 2024

‘He wins praise from sources for his technical knowledge and nuanced approach when it comes to private client disputes.' Chambers UK, 2023

'Turns around instructions very quickly and has a real expertise in the field of contentious executry and wills cases. He is very good with clients and instils confidence in them.' Chambers UK, 2022

'Roddy has a meticulous eye and demonstrates excellent preparation. An astute junior.' Legal 500, 2024

'A junior with a calm head and charisma that clients welcome.' Legal 500, 2023

'Roddy provides clear and concise advice on difficult matters. He is particularly helpful in setting out a clear pathway to resolve an issue and does not get bogged down in overly scholarly analysis of cases.' Legal 500, 2022

• Standing Junior Counsel to the Advocate General for Scotland, August 2018 (reappointed September 2021).
• Panel member of the Schools Closure Review Panels, January 2021 to date.
• Reporter, Session Cases, May 2020 to date.
• Temporary Junior Counsel to Office of the Advocate General (Home Office) from August 2016 to December 2018.
• Civil Case Indexer, Faculty of Advocates Library, March 2017 to date.
• Tutor, University of Edinburgh Diploma (civil court practice), January 2016 to June 2018.
• Member, Scottish Rugby Union Disciplinary Panel, September 2014 to date (appointed to disciplinary panels for European and domestic cases).
• Member World Rugby Disciplinary Panel.
• Trustee, Fire Fighters Charity (UK charity), December 2013 to November 2018.

• Trustee member of the Joint Faculty Abbotsford Board, January 2021 to date.
• Member of Faculty Council, January 2020 to December 2022.

• The Appointment of an Attorney as an Executor
• The Registration of Wills
• Death of an Executor Dative: Appointment of a Judicial Factor
• Termination of Power of Attorney and the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000
• The Remedy of Reduction in Executry Cases: Part 2
• The Remedy of Reduction in Executry Cases: Part 1
• Has Fire Service Liability Been Extinguished in Scotland?
• Contentious Executries: Problems with Succession to Heritable Property
• Murray Group Holdings Ltd and Others v HMRC: HMRC's new tactics win the day in the Court of Session
• Death and the Transfer of Heritable Property
• Opposing the Appointment of an Executor Dative
• Redress of a Beneficiary Against an Attorney

• Lamb, Noter [2026] CSOH 73 – Sequel to the below case.  This is the decision of the Lord Ordinary following proof as to an application by a judicial factor for special powers.
• Estate of the Late Archibald Murray [2026] SC SEL 94 - Counsel for an applicant for confirmation in circumstances where the applicant had previously declined office.  This was a novel point in respect of executry practice.
• Haq v Irvine and others [2026] CSOH 45 – Counsel for the Executors of a deceased individual, in whose estate the deceased’s family sought reduction of his last, professionally prepared, Will.  This is the decision of the Lord Ordinary following proof.  The pursuers were unsuccessful.
• Sharpley v Walker (GLW-A873-24) 1 April 2026 – Counsel for the defender, an attorney, who was sued by a deceased’s executor in respect of actions during a period in which the attorney was in office.  This was a decision following debate.  One of the issues concerned whether the pursuer had title to sue for an unconfirmed debt.
• Ahmed v Ahmed [2026] CSOH 30 - This case concerns an action for reduction of the grant of confirmation.  Actions of this nature are uncommon in contrast to where confirmation is being reduced in consequence of reduction of a will.  This is a decision following debate in which the defender challenged the relevancy of the pursuer’s case.
• O’Neil v HMRC [2026] UKUT 0013 (TCC) - As standing junior I acted as counsel for HMRC in the appeal to the Upper Tribunal.  The issues on appeal included treatment of the tax payers receipt of payment post cessation of their business.  The appeal was dismissed on all grounds.
• Scott v Reeves [2026] SC GLA 57 – Counsel for the pursuer in an action seeking reduction of the will of the parties’ deceased mother.  The basis of the action was facility, circumvention and undue influence.  The pursuer succeeded on both grounds.  This is the decision of the proof, following four days of evidence and a hearing on submissions.
• G, Applicant [2025] SAC 23 2025, S.L.T. (SAC) 103 - Counsel for the applicant and appellant.  In this case the applicant sought warrant to disinter the remains of his late daughter, to be expatriated to the country in which the applicant lives.  At first instance the Sheriff refused the application.  This decision is the authoritative judgement of the Sheriff Appeal Court which granted the application on appeal.  The decision is important: it considers the competency of an appeal of the Sheriff’s decision and then reviews the law, including the application of an applicants’ rights under ECHR.
• Lamb, Noter [2025] CSOH 79 – Counsel for the respondent in an application by a judicial factor for powers to wind up a trust estate.  At debate the issue was whether the respondent had title and interest to answer the judicial factor’s note.  
• The Faculty of Advocates and The Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland [2025] CSIH 5, S.L.T. 171 – Junior Counsel to the Dean of Faculty in a special case concerning the interpretation of legislation which affects the eligibility of applicants in seeking judicial appointment.  
• Trustees of the Pitlochry Trust, Petitioner [2024] CSIH 12 S.L.T. 537 - Curator Ad Litem to minor children in a trust variation petition under section 1 of the Trusts (Scotland) Act 1961. The Petitioners sought to postpone the date of vesting and introduce another beneficiary. The issue was whether the arrangement was prejudicial to the wards.
• Application for Confirmation as Executor to the estate of the late Kenneth Muir [2024] SC EDIN 16, S.L.T. (Sh Ct) 23 - Counsel for the applicant in seeking confirmation to the estate of a man who died abroad, without property in Scotland, but whose domicile of origin was in Scotland. The court determined that an application was competent, dependent upon identifying the domicile of last residence within Scotland.
• Scott-May v Scott-May [2024] SC PER 13 - Counsel for the Pursuers in an action seeking division and sale of property. The issue at debate was the extent of the parties' rights having regard to a bequest by their mother.
• Conforth, Petitioners [2024] SC SEL 8, S.L.T. (Sh Ct) 27 - Counsel for two petitioners who sought to be appointed as executors of a deceased man, deriving from their position as attorneys to their incapax mother, who was nominated as the deceased's executor. The issue concerned the competency of delegation of powers.
• Knapman and Wadesman [2024] SC JED 3 - Counsel for two applicants seeking to be appointed as executors under a deceased's home-made intended Will. This was a novel case concerning the application of the Requirements of Writing (Scotland) Act 1995, where the deceased had signed the first chronological page of the document, but not the other pages.
• Commissioners for HMRC v Vermilion Holdings Limited [2023] UKSC 37,1 W.L.R. 3908  - Junior Counsel for HMRC in an appeal against the decision of the Inner House concerning the taxation of an option agreement. The Supreme Court allowed HMRC's appeal in the case.
• Somerville v Allan [2023] SC EDIN 38 - Counsel for the Pursuer in an action seeking reduction of a Will on the basis that the testator lacked capacity or, alternatively, that the testator's Will had been procured through facility and circumvention and undue influence. The Sheriff granted reduction on all grounds, following a 9-day proof.
• Crockwell v Pettigrew (GLW-A305-22) 29th August 2023 - Counsel for Pursuers as beneficiaries seeking an accounting from their mother's Executors. This was a Debate on the relevancy of the Defenders' position that they had produced information outwith the court process, and thus did not need to account further. The Sheriff held that the Defenders' position was irrelevant.
• O'Neil v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2023] UKFTT 00290 (TC) - Counsel for HMRC in an appeal against HMRC's assessments in relation to a payment received after the cessation of the appellants' business. The case proceeded to an evidential hearing before the tax tribunal at which the substantive appeals were dismissed.
• C v Inverclyde Council (GRE-AW18-20) - Counsel for the Defenders in an opposed application for guardianship. The case proceeded to a three day proof. One of the issues was whether guardianship was necessary in light of other compulsory measures.
• Blair v Currie [2022] CSIH 58, S.C. 90  - This was a reclaiming motion against the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor. The Inner House partially allowed the reclaiming motion which affects a beneficiary's rights in an executry.
• Lesley Currie v Susan Blair [2022] CSOH 88, S.L.T. 34 - Counsel for the Defender who was being sued for an accounting in relation to her intromissions as attorney of a deceased's estate. The Lord Ordinary sustained the Defender's preliminary plea that a beneficiary had no title to sue the attorney.
• Revenue and Customs Commissioners v Zaman [2022] UKUT 252 (TCC) - Counsel for HMRC in relation to the burden of proof in an appeal concerning personal liability on the director of a company which had been assessed for VAT.
• Trustees of the Aboyne Castle Estate Trust, Petitioners [2022] CSIH 31 - Curator Ad Litem to minor children in a trust variation petition where the issue concerned the approach to be applied under section 1 of the Trusts (Scotland) Act 1961.
• Harley v Harley's Executrix 2022 S.C.L.R. 263  - Counsel for the Pursuer in an action concerning the valuation of shares for the purposes of calculating a legal rights claim.
• Thomson v Warwick [2022] SC INV 31 (counsel for pursuers, in a case against two attorneys. This is the decision of the Sheriff after a 12 day proof, granting reduction of the transfer of property on the basis of facility and circumvention and undue influence)
• Kennedy v Bonnici [2021] CSOH 106, S.L.T. 63 - Junior Counsel for two defenders who were sued as the last trustees of a trust on the basis of vicarious liability for historic abuse by an employee.
• T v S (PAI-B18-21) 13 August 2021 - Counsel for the guardian of an adult with incapacity in an action concerning the right to recover information to seek reduction of the adult's Will.
• Vermilion Holdings Ltd v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2021] CSIH 45, 2021 S.L.T. 1233 - Junior Counsel for HMRC in an appeal against the taxation of an option agreement.
• Jordan v O'Reilly 2021 [2021] SC EDIN 8, Rep. L.R. 54 - Counsel for the Defender, an executor, in an action for personal injury seeking damages from the deceased's estate.
• Cabot v Maclennan [2021] SC ABE 6 - Counsel for a Judicial Factor in a claim concerning the extent of a judicial factor's liability to creditors of the ward.
• PA v HMRC [2020] UKUT 324 (AAC) - Counsel for HMRC in relation to the effect of a vexatious litigant order and the status of the First-tier Tribunal.
• HMRC v Vermilion Holdings Ltd [2020] UKUT 162 (TC) - Counsel for HMRC in a successful appeal against a decision of the First-tier Tribunal in relation to the taxation of an option agreement.
• MR, Petitioner [2019] CSOH 52 - Counsel for the respondent, in opposing an application for permission to proceed with a judicial review.
• Adam v Sidgwick SLC/18/17, 2019 S.L.T. (Land Ct) 79 - Counsel for the Defender, an executor, in a proof before the Land Court, in relation to the extent of an agricultural boundary.