Claire Frances Gill

Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision

The SRA alleged that Ms Gill, a Carter-Ruck partner, sent a letter in April 2017 containing an improper threat of litigation while acting for Ruja Ignatova and OneCoin (later found fraudulent), said to be a breach of integrity and public trust under the SRA Principles 2011. The Tribunal summarily dismissed the allegation as legally flawed, speculative and unsupported by evidence, finding she acted professionally and there was no proof she knew proceedings would not be pursued. In this costs judgment the Tribunal found 'good reason' to depart from the usual 'no order as to costs' position given prolonged unexplained delay, a diffuse/shifting case and legal inaccuracies. It rejected the SRA's indemnity-principle/CFA Lite jurisdictional objections, holding such matters were for detailed assessment and that the Chorley principle could provide an alternative basis. The Tribunal ordered the SRA to pay the Respondent's costs from 2 May 2025 on the standard (not indemnity) basis, declined to consider a late CFA variation, and made no interim payment order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the SRA's costs of two failed applications. No finding of dishonesty was made; the allegation was dismissed.