A prominent family barrister’s application for over £350,000 in costs relating to a struck-out disciplinary case has been denied by the Bar Tribunals & Adjudication Service.

Dr Charlotte Proudman applied for £353,017, arguing that she should be awarded costs on an indemnity basis as the charges against her were ‘so doomed to fail that they should never have been proceeded with’. She claimed her prosecution was ‘the equivalent of a malicious prosecution’ and that she was ‘improperly pursued and harassed’ by the Bar Standards Board ‘in a way that a man would not have been’ had he been the author of the tweets that gave rise to her prosecution.

The BTAS costs determination added: ‘She asserts that [it] therefore follows that these proceedings were improperly brought and pursued, and constitute discriminatory and oppressive behaviour that should not be countenanced.’

The tribunal said it was ‘not in a position to come to a reasoned conclusion as to whether these proceedings were maliciously brought because the matter was simply not addressed before us’.

It added that in the absence of evidence from the ‘decision-makers’ to bring the case before the tribunal, including the independent barrister ‘who advised on the propriety of the charges’, it would ‘not be appropriate for us to make any order as to costs where those costs were incurred in support of allegations of malpractice. We would be making an order for costs in respect of very serious allegations without an evidential basis for making it’.

Charlotte Proudman

Charlotte Proudman

Finding Proudman’s case was not one that would ‘attract an award of costs’, the judgment said: ‘In this case those responsible for bringing the proceedings against Dr Proudman came to the clear view that the line drawn by [ECHR authority Morice v France] was crossed and Article 10 protection was not available to Dr Proudman. We took a different view and expressed it, we hope, with firmness and clarity. That is a long way from holding that the decision to proceed was fundamentally misconceived.’

No order was made as to costs.