RSPCA left with huge legal bill after losing court fight over will

The animal charity was told it must pay most of the 1.3m costs incurred during its High Court dispute with Dr Christine Gill.

Dr Gill's parents had left their entire estate – the 2.15m-valued Potto Carr Farm, near Northallerton, and 200,000 in savings – to the charity, but the Leeds University lecturer overturned the will last October after a judge ruled her "domineering" father had coerced her mother into making it.

It emerged yesterday that Dr Gill made numerous offers to settle the case out of court but the charity declined them all.

Now the charity faces paying much more than it would have done had it agreed a settlement with Dr Gill before the trial.

Judge James Allen QC yesterday handed down his second judgment in the case, in which he criticised the RSPCA for its "somewhat unreasonable" attitude to mediation.

It read: "The court is satisfied that despite (Dr Gill's) repeated attempts to resolve her dispute with (the RSPCA) by mediation or some other form of alternative dispute resolution, (the RSPCA) remained resolute in its opposition...Further, (the RSPCA) clearly displayed a lack of enthusiasm in relation to the resolution of the dispute by a negotiated settlement."

The judgment stated that Dr Gill first offered to settle the case in August 2007, when she proposed the RSPCA give her 350,000 from the sale of the farm, along with two fields, but this was rejected five weeks later.

The charity then made what it described as a "final compromise offer of settlement" of 50,000, plus Dr Gill's reasonable costs, which was turned down.

Dr Gill instead made a counter-offer, refused by the RSPCA, that she receive the farm and 200,000 savings but pay the charity 500,000 and its costs.

The lecturer made another attempt to negotiate in June 2008, a month before the trial began, when the RSPCA offered to pay her 650,000 plus costs from the proceeds of the estate.

She asked the charity to reconsider its position but it insisted any meeting would be solely about establishing how a 650,000 settlement could be achieved.

The judgment revealed Dr Gill attempted to settle the case even after the trial had begun, offering in October 2008 to accept 220 acres of the estate, which would have left the RSPCA with land worth 1.06m. The proposal was rejected five days later.

Yesterday the court heard that Dr Gill's legal costs had reached 900,000, while the charity had spent about 400,000.

Outside court, Dr Gill said: "After last October's judgment, the RSPCA attempted to justify its stance by saying it was obliged under charity law to defend the claim to trial, that it was a compassionate organisation and that I was the barrier to settlement. Today's decision sets the record straight."

The trial heard Dr Gill, an only child, worked on the farm for more than 30 years and looked after her parents, John and Joyce Gill, as their health declined.

Her father died in 1999, but it was only after her mother died in 2006 that she realised her parents had made mirror wills which left everything they owned to each other on the death of the first, and to the RSPCA on the death of the second.

The court found Mrs Gill, who suffered from agoraphobia and severe anxiety, had wanted Dr Gill to inherit the farm but her husband had exerted pressure over her to favour the RSPCA, even though she had "an avowed dislike" of the charity.

Although the judge ruled the RSPCA should pay most of Dr Gill's costs, the charity intends to appeal against the trial outcome, which means it could be many months before payment details are finalised.

An RSPCA spokeswoman said: "At this stage no specific sums have been calculated, so we don't yet know what either bill will be.

"It is therefore too early for us to comment on the costs when they are not known."

HOW THE QUEEN GOT INVOLVED

Not even begging letters to the Queen and the Archbishop of Canterbury, the RSPCA's patron and vice-patron, could persuade the charity to reach a compromise over Potto Carr Farm.

The trial heard Dr Gill's husband, fellow university lecturer Andrew Baczkowski, became so exasperated he wrote to both figureheads in October 2007.

Dr Baczkowski wrote: "Under the threat of having to pay the RSPCA's legal costs to date, my wife has had to agree to the sale of the family farm, even though her heart screams out against it."