The SDT ruled that there was insufficient evidence to pursue a SLAPP case against Carter-Ruck’s Claire Frances Gill
The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) has dismissed a SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) prosecution against Claire Frances Gill, a partner at the renowned defamation firm Carter-Ruck. The case stemmed from an alleged improper threat sent in April 2017, while Carter-Ruck was representing Dr. Ruja Ignatova, the now-disappeared figure behind the OneCoin cryptocurrency scam, which later became known as a Ponzi-style fraud.
Gill had been accused of sending or arranging to send the alleged threat, but she denied the allegation entirely. The SDT heard Gill’s application for summary dismissal over two days, and the tribunal returned with its decision after just under an hour of deliberation.
Panel chair Alison Kellett stated in her oral decision that, while it was unusual to make such an application, it was “wholly appropriate” in this case. Kellett explained that the case was based on hindsight rather than evidence of professional misconduct. She emphasized that the information available at the time did not indicate that OneCoin was a fraudulent enterprise. “Suspicion is not equivalent to knowledge,” she said, noting that it would not be just or proportionate for the case to continue.
Embed from Getty Images
The SDT found that the advice Gill had given at the time was measured, professional, and conscientious, based on explicit client instructions. There was no evidence to suggest she had reason to believe those instructions were not genuine. Furthermore, once Gill realized that the necessary information was not forthcoming from the client, she advised against proceeding with the litigation.
The SDT also stated that there was nothing in the tone of Gill’s correspondence that could be deemed misleading or improper. The tribunal acknowledged the efforts of those who ultimately exposed the fraud but clarified that such revelations did not alter the conduct of those acting at the time. Gill was described as a solicitor acting in good faith and following her client’s instructions.
Following the SDT’s decision, Richard Coleman KC, representing Gill, indicated he would seek an application for costs. A costs hearing has been scheduled for January, with the total costs of the case reportedly nearing £1 million. The substantive hearing had originally been set for June next year.
This decision marks the second setback for the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) in its attempts to clamp down on so-called “SLAPP” cases. Earlier this week, a partner at the London firm Hamlins was cleared of any misconduct in another SLAPP-related case.