The Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 (the Act) provides a definition of a SLAPP and made provision for changes to be made to the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) (see here for our article on the new reforms introduced by the Act). The Act left it to the Court to make amendments to the CPR to bring the reforms into effect. In this article we look at the amendments to the CPR which came into effect on 6 April 2025.

What are SLAPPs?

SLAPPs are most commonly associated with media law claims, including defamation, data protection and privacy, and involve claims made by corporations and individuals. 

Under the Act a claim may be characterised as a SLAPP if:

1. The Claimant’s behaviour in relation to the matters complained of has, or is intended to have, the effect of restraining the Defendant’s exercise of the right to freedom of speech
2. Any of the information that is, or would be, disclosed by the exercise of that right has to do with economic crime
3. Any part of that disclosure is, or would be, made for a purpose related to the public interest in combating economic crime, and
4. Any of the behaviour of the Claimant in relation to the matters complained of is intended to cause the Defendant:
   i) harassment, alarm or distress
   ii) expense, or
   iii) any other harm or inconvenience, beyond that ordinarily encountered in the course of properly conducted litigation

What are the amendments to the CPR?

The amendments are designed to give the Court new powers to strike out a Claimant's case if it is found to be a SLAPP in accordance with the definition in the Act and the Claimant has failed to show that "it is more likely than not the claim would succeed at trial" (Part 3.4(d)).

This mechanism differs slightly from the existing CPR strike out provisions in that both elements must be satisfied before such a claim can be struck out.

The Court's discretion on costs under CPR 44 will now extend to SLAPPs so that the Court will only be able to order the Defendant to pay the Claimant's costs where the "misconduct" of the Defendant justifies such an order.

Will this really act as a deterrent to well-resourced Claimants? Only time will tell and it remains to be seen what the Court's approach will be in these cases.

The amendments to the CPR only apply to SLAPPs in the context of economic crime and so for the time being its application is limited.

Regulatory focus on SLAPPs

In the meantime, in the 18 month period between the Act and the new rules coming into effect, there has been continuing regulatory focus on this area. Solicitors and law firms are facing ongoing scrutiny where it is alleged that they are acting in claims where SLAPPs tactics have been deployed, irrespective of whether they are acting in economic crime claims. 

The SRA updated its Warning Notice on SLAPPs for solicitors and law firms in May 2024. The Warning Notice emphasises that the SRA's regulatory role is distinct from the Court's new powers and procedures and that the SRA's powers are not limited to economic crime or contingent on a claim being declared a SLAPP under the legal test set out in the Act. The Warning Notice also states that the SRA regards the term SLAPP as referring to

"action taken on behalf of clients which operates to harass, intimidate and financially or psychologically exhaust another party with the aim of preventing lawful publication of matters relating to the public interest"

This is therefore the wider approach that the Regulator will take when reviewing alleged SLAPPs.

Finally, the Warning Notice provides clarification that, where a case is classified as a SLAPP under the Act and continues through the Court (presumably because the Claimant has satisfied the Court that that it is more likely than not the claim would succeed at trial) a lawyer will not automatically be prohibited from representing their client in the ongoing proceedings. The fact that the case is permitted to continue, however, will not necessarily preclude a regulatory finding as the SRA does not regard itself as being constrained from taking action where these provisions have not been invoked or where the claim in question is at a pre litigation stage. See our article on the key takeaways from the Regulator’s Decision in the recent case of SRA v Hurst: 'SLAPP happy?', Clare Hughes-Williams & Megan Hill, DAC Beachcroft, NLJ, March 2025, p.18.

Commentary

With the amendments to the CPR bringing the SLAPPs reforms in the Act into effect, the procedural and regulatory mechanism to address SLAPPs conduct will now run in parallel. Currently it appears unlikely that further legislation will be passed to extend the legal reforms to claims that do not relate to economic crime as the Government has not announced any current plans to do so pending the monitoring of the new reforms under the Act. So, it may be some time before we see any further, meaningful change.