Camilla accepts instructions across all areas of commercial litigation, with a particular focus on complex, high-value and multi-party disputes, including those involving allegations of fraud, conspiracy and dishonesty. She has trial experience in the Commercial Court and the Business and Property Courts, both led and unled. Her recent experience includes:

• GI Globinvestment Ltd & Ors v XY ERS UK Limited & Ors [2025] EWHC 740 (Comm): Successfully defending the investment fund services providers VP Fund Solutions (Luxembourg) SA and VP Fund Solutions (Liechtenstein) AG in a seven-week Commercial Court trial before Jacobs J. The £50m claim was brought by Italian investors alleging an unlawful means conspiracy to induce them to invest in a Luxembourg-incorporated umbrella fund and raised question regarding whether intention to injure can be established where loss is only foreseeable and whether it is possible to be a passive participant in a conspiracy (led by Richard Blakeley KC, Brick Court).
• NOx Emissions Group Litigation: Acting for Mercedes in the defence of group litigation brought on behalf of over 400,000 claimants, tried alongside 12 other group litigation orders with around one million claimants and estimated damages sought exceeding £6 billion (led by Tom Adam KC, Brick Court and Richard Blakeley KC, Brick Court).
• Jorvik Design Group Ltd v Rhodes: Acting unled for the defendant, a former director, in a circa £1.1m claim brought by a UK telecommunications company in the Business and Property Courts  for breach of directors’ duties and fraudulent misrepresentation, including successfully obtaining an order for security for costs.
• Slivnik & Ors v FCDO & Ors: Acting for the FCDO and successfully challenging jurisdiction in a claim valued at over £100m in the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court alleging an unlawful means conspiracy arising out of the 2011 collapse of the Anguillan banking sector, which also raised claims under Article 1 of Protocol 1 ECHR read with Article 14 (led by Daniel Saoul KC).
• MWB Group Holdings (Takeover Panel Hearings Committee 2024/1): Acting for a Respondent in the most substantial proceedings ever brought before the Takeover Panel Hearings Committee, which resulted in the first compensation order made under the Panel’s statutory powers. Camilla’s client obtained a 50% reduction on the sanction sought by the Executive (led by Richard Eschwege KC, Brick Court).
• Therium Litigation Funding v Bugsby Property [2023] EWHC 2627 (Comm): Obtaining a proprietary freezing order in a £27m dispute about the enforceability of litigation funding agreements, the first post-PACCAR case on litigation funding in the Commercial Court (led by Theo Barclay).
• SIA Investments v Bryce & Pardus Wealth: Obtaining a freezing injunction over €3 million under section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996 in support of German arbitration proceedings, and pursuing committal proceedings for contempt of court and a disclosure application following breach of the freezing order.
• Oldroyd v Reed & Ors: Representing a corporate trustee shareholder in a high value unfair prejudice petition (led by Shail Patel KC).
• Jazgarska v Kalapong & Ors: Acting for the Claimant in a claim for breach of trust, knowing receipt, dishonest assistance and rectification of the register pursuant to section 125 of the Companies Act 2006 in respect of an English company engaged in investment in Ukraine.
• Henderson & Jones v Ross, Barnes & Ors [2022] EWHC 2560 (Ch): As a pupil, Camilla assisted the team acting for the Defendant solicitor in a £50m dishonesty claim relating to the restructuring of a cosmetic surgery business, including allegations of unlawful means conspiracy, transactions defrauding creditors and unlawful distributions.
• Acting unled in striking out a claim for breach of contract brought against Microsoft Limited.
• As a tenant, assisting in advising on a high value LCIA arbitration (London seat) arising out of the sale of an aircraft.

Camilla has a particular interest in litigation involving allegations of conspiracy, deceit, secret commissions and dishonest assistance. Her recent experience includes:

• GIG Investments & Ors v XY ERS UK Limitred & Ors [2025] EWHC 740 (Comm): Successfully defending the investment fund services providers VP Liechtenstein and VP Luxembourg in a high value unlawful means conspiracy claim arising out of investments in Luxembourg incorporated umbrella fund (led by Richard Blakely, Brick Court).
• Jazgarska v Kalapong & Ors: Acting for the Claimant in a claim for breach of trust, knowing receipt, dishonest assistance and rectification of register pursuant to s.125 CA 2006 in respect of an English company engaged in investment in Ukraine.
• Henderson & Jones v Ross, Barnes & Ors [2022] EWHC 2560 (Ch): As a pupil, Camilla assisted the team acting for the Defendant solicitor to a £50m dishonesty claim relating to the restructuring of a cosmetic surgery business, including allegations of unlawful means conspiracy, transactions defrauding creditors and unlawful distributions.
• While at Slaughter and May, Camilla worked on a high value claim brought in the English courts by a syndicate of lenders alleging unlawful means conspiracy against company directors in the context of French insolvency proceedings.

Camilla is experienced in interlocutory applications in a civil fraud context, including freezing orders and contempt of court proceedings. Her recent experience includes:

• SIA Investments v Bryce & Pardus Wealth: s44 Arbitration Act application: Obtaining freezing injunction over €3million in support of German arbitration proceedings.
• SIA Investments v Bryce & Pardus Wealth: Pursuing contempt of court committal proceedings and disclosure application pursuant to breach of the freezing order.
• Therium Litigation Funding v Bugsby Property [2023] EWHC 2627 (Comm): Obtaining proprietary freezing order in £27m dispute about the enforceability of litigation funding agreements (first post-PACCAR case on litigation funding in the Commercial Court) led by Theo Barclay

Camilla is ranked as a Rising Star for Competition in The Legal 500 UK Bar 2027. She has experience of acting for both defendants and claimants in large scale competition litigation, having worked as a barrister and solicitor on some of the largest competition damages claims brought before the UK courts, including abuse of dominance claims in the technology sector and cartel claims. Her current and recent cases include:

• Dr Brook v Google [2026] CAT 65 (1720/7/7/25): Acting for the class representative in collective proceedings worth circa £5bn brought against Google in the Competition Appeal Tribunal on behalf of circa 200,000 UK advertisers, alleging that Google has abused its dominant position in the general search and search advertising markets. The Tribunal certified the claim on an opt-out basis in August 2026 (led by Robert O’Donoghue KC, Brick Court, and Kieron Beal KC, Blackstone Chambers).
• Professor Rodger v Google (1673/7/7/24): Acting for the class representative in collective proceedings worth circa £1bn brought against Google in the Competition Appeal Tribunal on behalf of UK app developers, concerning the Google Play Store. The claim raised novel questions about the application of the Chapter II prohibition to two-sided digital markets. The Class Representative obtained the largest settlement approved by the CAT since the opt-out regime was introduced in 2015 (led by Robert O’Donoghue KC, Brick Court, and Kieron Beal KC, Blackstone Chambers).
• Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen v Meta Platforms, Inc. & Ors (1433/7/7/22): Acting for Meta in the defence of a circa £2bn opt-out collective claim brought on behalf of UK Facebook users, alleging that Meta abused its dominant position by imposing unfair terms and an unfair price in relation to the use of users’ personal data (led by Marie Demetriou KC and Tony Singla KC, Brick Court).
• Waterside Class Limited v Mowi ASA & Ors [2026] CAT 32 (1643/7/7/24): Acting for the proposed class representative in a £382m opt-out claim on behalf of UK consumers alleging collusion between the largest producers of Norwegian Atlantic salmon (led by Sarah Abram KC, Brick Court).

At Slaughter and May:

• Acted for First MTR South Western Trains Limited in the first standalone claims issued under the opt-out collective proceedings regime.
• Advisory work for clients regarding preliminary rulings relating to follow on damages for breaches of competition law in the context of the Damages Directive.
• Worked on TFEU Article 101 and 102 investigations and merger control investigations in the firm’s Competition office in Brussels.

At Uría Menéndez:

• Acted for DAF in high-value follow on damages litigation following the European Commission’s truck cartel investigation.
• Acted for Paramount in respect of a CNMC (Spanish National Markets and Competition Commission) investigation into a potential TFEU Article 101 infringement.

Camilla has experience of large scale group litigation and class actions, and an understanding of the particular issues such cases present. Her experience at 4 New Square and Slaughter and May includes:

• Worked (as pupil) on Various Investors v G4S Ltd in claims under section 90A of FSMA 2000 for statutory compensation in relation to published information (supervised by Shail Patel KC).
• Worked (as pupil) on O’Higgins FX Class Representative Limited v Barclays Bank, in relation to consequentials hearing following carriage dispute (supervised by Shail Patel KC).
• Milasi Josiya & 7,262 others v BAT: Claims brought under Malawian Law in the English courts by a number of Malawian tobacco farmers, concerning allegations of child and forced labour on third party farms in Malawi (Slaughter and May).

Camilla is ranked as a Rising Star for Sanctions in The Legal 500 UK Bar 2027. She acts for and advises the UK Government and non-governmental organisations on sanctions designations and challenges to them, and on the interaction between sanctions and other legal regimes. Her recent experience includes:

• Evtushenkova v Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (AC-2025-LON-001199): Acting for the FCDO in a judicial review challenge to a designation under the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019. The claim raised questions about the designation of family members of designated persons and the meaning of ‘acting on behalf of’ under the Russia Regulations (led by David Blundell KC, Landmark Chambers).
• Advising a UK Government department on the litigation risk associated with proposed designations of financial institutions under a UK sanctions regime.
• EG Justice: Acting for EG Justice, instructed through the International Lawyers Project, in preparing submissions to the European Union relating to the designation of senior political figures in Equatorial Guinea under the EU Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime.
• Advising an anti-corruption NGO on the interplay between the UK Global Anti-Corruption sanctions regime and civil recovery proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, including the principles relevant to deconflicting sanctions and civil recovery.
• Advising an NGO on sanctions and public international law issues relating to settlements in the West Bank.

Camilla is ranked as a Leading Junior for Public International Law in The Legal 500 UK Bar 2027 and was appointed to the Attorney General’s C Panel for Public International Law in 2025. She has a particular interest in public international law and the intersection between climate change, migration and human rights, and is instructed by States, international organisations and NGOs.

From February to June 2024 and January to March 2025, Camilla worked as seconded external counsel at the Foreign and Commonwealth Development Office (FCDO), where she was involved in a range of public international law matters.

Recent examples of her work include:

• Request for an Advisory Opinion on the Climate Emergency and Human Rights: Acting for a coalition of Caribbean civil society organisations from low-lying island states before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the advisory proceedings requested by Chile and Colombia concerning States’ obligations to respond to the climate emergency within the framework of international human rights law. The counsel team filed written submissions and made oral submissions at the hearing in Manaus, Brazil; the Court delivered its advisory opinion in July 2025 (led by Wendy Miles KC, Twenty Essex).
• AAA v Commissioner of the British Indian Ocean Territory & Ors [2024] BIOT CA (Civ) 1 / KP v Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs & Ors [2025] EWHC 370 (Admin): Acting for the FCDO as seconded external counsel in two related cases brought by Sri Lankan asylum seekers in the British Indian Ocean Territory and in the High Court of England and Wales, which raised questions about the interpretation of the UK-US treaty concerning Diego Garcia and the nature and scope of the principle of “constructive” or “de facto” refoulement under international law (led by Sir James Eadie KC and Jack Anderson).
• Escalona Castejón v Nueva EPS y Fundación Valle de Lilí (Exp. T-10.503.566): Representing the Petitioner, a Venezuelan refugee in Colombia, in proceedings in the Colombian Constitutional Court seeking emergency access to waiting lists for organ transplants, with submissions on the international law right to health, the right to life and the principle of non-discrimination.
• Haki na Sheria Initiative v Cabinet Secretary Ministry of Interior and Coordination of National Government & Others (AMM Case), Petition No. E011 of 2022: Strategic litigation in the courts of Kenya concerning the citizenship rights of refugees married to Kenyan citizens and of children born to a refugee or asylum seeker and a Kenyan citizen (led by Sonali Naik KC, Garden Court Chambers, and Ali Al-Karim, Brick Court).
• Mr Khairuzzaman v Government of Malaysia: Preparing an expert report on the principle of non-refoulement as customary international law, in the context of proceedings seeking a stay of the extradition of the former high commissioner of Bangladesh to Malaysia (led by Marie Demetriou KC, Brick Court).
• Working in conjunction with the NGO Lawyers for Nature and Chilean law firms to examine the possibility of appointing representatives of nature to corporate boards under Chilean law.

Camilla has experience representing Claimants and Defendants in Judicial Review claims before the administrative court, as well as advisory work in respect of the ECHR. Recent examples of her work include:

• AAA v Commissioner of the British Indian Ocean Territory & Ors [2024] BIOT CA (Civ) 1 / KP v Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs & Ors [2025] EWHC 370 (Admin): Acting for the FCDO as seconded external counsel in two related cases brought by Sri Lankan asylum seekers in the British Indian Ocean Territory Supreme Court and in the High Court of England and Wales.
• Thomas v SoS for Justice: Acting for Claimant in a claim for Judicial Review of HMS Berwyn’s investigation and appeals processes.
• Providing pro bono advice on a claim in respect of pensions payments to prisoners, under Article 14 ECHR and A1P1 ECHR.
• As a pupil, Camilla assisted the team that succeeded in Green & Others v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (to which the Secretary of State for the Home Department was an interested party), arising out of claims that the Police Pensions Regulations were incompatible with Articles 8, 12 and 14 (read with A1P1) of the ECHR (supervised by Richard O’Brien KC).
• As a pupil, Camilla worked on proceedings before the Investigatory Powers Tribunal in respect of a challenge to a warrant permitting the NCA to obtain encrypted messages from “Encrochat” devices (supervised by Richard O’Brien KC).
• As a pupil, Camilla assisted in advising corporate entities seeking to bring claims in Strasbourg under A1P1 ECHR, and advising governmental departments on how policy proposals might be impacted by A1P1 ECHR (supervised by Richard O’Brien KC).

Camilla has experience in international arbitration having worked at both Slaughter and May and the arbitration department of Uría Menéndez in Madrid before coming to the bar. She is familiar with many of the institutional rules, including ICC, ICSID and LCIA, and has been involved in high-profile, high-value disputes involving English law, foreign law and international law. She speaks Spanish and French and is comfortable reviewing and working with documents in both languages.

• SIA Investments v Bryce & Pardus Wealth: Obtaining a freezing injunction over €3 million under section 44 of the Arbitration Act 1996 in support of German arbitration proceedings.
• As a tenant, Camilla has assisted in advising on a high value LCIA arbitration (London seat) arising out of the sale of an aircraft.

Camilla’s experience at Slaughter and May included:

• An ICC arbitration (London seat): acting for the investors in a US$ multi-billion dispute with a national electricity company and a State arising out of the construction of a power station.
• An ICC arbitration (French seat): acting for a Spanish construction company in relation to a contractual dispute arising out of a Heads of Terms.
• Advising investors in an ICSID arbitration under a BIT arising out of investment in a petroleum plant.

Camilla has extensive experience of conflicts of law issues and jurisdiction challenges. Her recent experience includes:

• Boroli v XY ERS UK Limited & Ors: Jurisdiction challenge raising Article 4 Rome II issues of applicable law in the context of a high value unlawful means conspiracy claim arising out of investments in a Luxembourg-incorporated umbrella fund (led by Richard Blakeley KC).
• Slivnik & Ors v FCDO & Ors: Successfully representing the FCDO in a jurisdiction challenge in the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court in the context of the 2011 collapse of the Anguillan banking sector (led by Daniel Saoul KC).
• Appearing unled in the High Court on a successful application for retrospective permission to serve a claim out of time.
• While at Slaughter and May, Camilla worked on group litigation brought against UK incorporated parent companies in respect of the activities of their overseas subsidiaries (including Josiya & 7,262 Ors v BAT). The particular focus of the work was on cross-border jurisdictional issues.
• Camilla was also involved in advising on jurisdictional challenges in the context of unlawful means conspiracy claims brought in the English courts in the context of French insolvency proceedings, and arbitration clauses in contractual disputes.

Camilla has a particular interest in derivative actions and unfair prejudice petitions. Her recent experience includes:

• Oldroyd v Reed & Ors: Represented a corporate trustee shareholder in a high value unfair prejudice petition (led by Shail Patel KC).
• Jazgarska v Kalapong & Ors: Acting for the Claimant in a claim including rectification of the register pursuant to section 125 of the Companies Act 2006.
• Jorvik Design Group Ltd v Rhodes: Acting unled for a former director in a claim for breach of directors’ duties.
• As a pupil, Camilla assisted in advising minority shareholders of a publicly listed energy company on potential claims against directors.

Camilla is frequently instructed in professional liability matters concerning claims involving a range of professionals, including solicitors, accountants, and financial advisers (including tax advisers). Recent examples of her work include:

• Taylor & Thomas v St Paul’s Solicitors: Acting for the Defendant Solicitor in a multi-million pound lost litigation claim arising out of complex, multi party fraud proceedings.
• Advising a claimant investor in relation to a potential claim against their financial advisor in respect of the Eclipse film finance schemes.
• As a pupil, Camilla worked on a number of professional negligence claims against insurance brokers (acting for the defendant broker), company directors in the insolvency context, and claims against solicitors in the context of judicial review.

• As a pupil, Camilla assisted a team advising Aviva in respect of allegedly fraudulent multi-million pound claims made under home insurance policies (supervised by Shail Patel KC).
• At Slaughter and May, Camilla was involved in advising Zurich in the FCA test case relating to business interruption insurance policies in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Camilla was instructed for a Respondent in the matter of MWB Group Holdings (Takeover Panel Hearings Committee 2024/1), the largest proceedings brought to date before the Takeover Panel Hearings Committee, which culminated in the first compensation order made under the Panel’s statutory powers. Camilla’s client obtained a 50% reduction on the sanction sought by the Executive and was not ordered to pay compensation (led by Richard Eschwege KC).

• "Very good: one to watch for the future, really good judgment, fully committed and hard working." (Legal 500 2027, Sanctions)

• "She is incredibly junior and on her way to great success. Camilla's greatest strengths are her lovely manner, organization, and quality of work. I cannot recommend her highly enough." (Legal 500 2027, Public International Law)

• "Camilla is a rising star and an exceptionally bright barrister. She is extremely hardworking, analytically sharp, and very strong on the details of a case. Her drafting is excellent." (Legal 500 2027, Competition)
• "Camilla is extremely bright and meticulous." (Chambers & Partners 2026, Fraud)
• "She is very commercial, thorough and has an unrivalled attention to detail but is also a strategic thinker." (Chambers & Partners 2026, Fraud)
• "Camilla Cockerill gains recognition for her fast-growing civil fraud practice, in which she is routinely instructed on matters involving dishonesty and conspiracy. She has experience working in large teams and has appeared in the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court." (Chambers & Partners 2026, Fraud)
• "Excellent team player with a real passion for the case and the cause." (Legal 500 2026, Public International Law)