The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) will file an appeal against dismissal of their case against Claire Frances Gill.

As reported by Law360 on January 15th (paywalled);

The Solicitors Regulation Authority said Thursday that it will appeal a tribunal’s decision to throw out disciplinary proceedings against a Carter-Ruck partner.

The SRA recommended Gill be prosecuted in August 2025. The recommendation was based on Gill “sen[ding] or arrang[ing] to be sent correspondence which contained an improper threat of litigation.”

The threat of litigation pertained to a letter Gill sent to a OneCoin critic in 2016. At the time Gill and Carter-Ruck were working for Ruja Ignatova, founder of the $4 billion OneCoin Ponzi scheme.

In December 2025 the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) dismissed the SRA’s prosecution recommendation. The SDT essentially cleared Gill of any client due-diligence liability.

Key arguments to be raised in the SRA’s appeal are understood to be

  • premature dismissal – objection to the SDT dismissing the case pre-trial, arguing that there is enough evidence to at the very least warrant the case proceeding to trial;
  • even if Gill didn’t know about OneCoin’s fraud (which was discoverable with even the slightest due-diligence), Gill still acted recklessly and was “willfully blind” to fraud her client was engaged in;
  • public OneCoin fraud warnings were red flags Carter-Ruck should have acted on relation to their representation of OneCoin and Ignatova; and
  • letting lawyers off for ethical misconduct on the basis they claim they “didn’t know” about easily verifiable fraud sets a dangerous precedent.

That last argument in particular is pertinent and raises the question of public interest in the SRA’s ability to hold lawyers accountable.

In the meantime, Gill is seeking to recover around $1.35 million in legal costs from the SRA. The outcome of the SRA’s appeal and Gill’s motion for costs remains pending.