​Former Cheltenham Borough Council chief Christine Laird failed to persuade the Court of Appeal today that she should not have to pay any of her legal costs of the £1 million fraud case against her.

The council’s case for fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation over her job application was dismissed by Mr Justice Hamblen at the High Court in London in June last year.

The judge ordered the council to pay 65% of Mrs Laird’s estimated £540,000 legal costs plus its own legal bill estimated at £400,000.

In making the order, he said that Mrs Laird had “thrown the kitchen sink” at the council with more than 30 allegations of breaches of duty, only one of which had been upheld.

The trial lasted more than 35 days.

John Dagnall, representing her at the Court of Appeal, argued that a charge of fraud was so serious that someone defending themselves must be able to raise any reasonable point without having their costs reduced when they are successful.

He said Mr Justice Hamblen had accepted “the drastic nature of the fraud claim” but had still left Mrs Laird having to find 35% of her own costs.

He said a defendant should be able to pursue any reasonable avenue to clear their names rather than having to chose which points to run or be penalised in costs.

“This defendant faced the risk of her reputation being ruined should the allegation have succeeded.

“On the judge’s analysis, if the individual takes all these points they risk the result where they succeed in their defence but are left facing a massive financial liability because they fail on various other issues.”

Lord Justice Moses said he had “considerable sympathy” for Mrs Laird, who had to defend herself against a serious allegation of fraud, but that did not justify her taking all the points she did which the trial judge had found disproportionate.

Lord Justice Thomas said: “The fact that the party succeeds overall is not sufficient to entitle them to recover all their costs.”

He said it is a rule that in awarding costs a judge must exercise discretion, taking into account the conduct of the parties and success or failure of the issues raised.

“It seems to me that a court has to do that in a case whether or not fraud is alleged.”

The council’s case at the High Court had been that Mrs Laird, 52, had claimed she was fit to take on the job when in fact she was suffering from mental health problems.

The High Court found Mrs Laird had not made false statements on a medical questionnaire after being offered the job in January 2002.

But the judge also found that Mrs Laird’s allegations of bullying and intimidation against the council were not true.

The council’s claim was for £982,673.19 against Mrs Laird for what it said was sustained loss and damages, plus costs.

Mrs Laird and her husband Hugh issued a statement after today’s hearing which said they were “disappointed” with the result.

“We felt the original finding which left us facing a huge bill was unjust. We also feel that today’s outcome is unfair.

“This result does not change the fact that Christine won the case. It was Cheltenham Borough Council who started this vindictive action.”