Writing in NLJ this week, Claudine Morgan, Hannah Gornall and Ellen Roberts of Charles Russell Speechlys examine the High Court’s decision in Kamal v Tax Policy Associates Ltd.
The court struck out a libel claim brought against tax commentator Dan Neidle and concluded it amounted to a statutory SLAPP under the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023. The judgment identifies conduct that may indicate a SLAPP, including inflated damages claims, demands for inappropriate remedies and attempts to uncover journalistic sources. Importantly, it confirms that reckless disregard for proper litigation standards may be enough, even without deliberate bad faith.
While hailed as a major step forward, the authors argue significant gaps remain. The current regime applies only to economic crime cases, strengthening calls for broader protections against litigation designed to suppress public interest speech.
