© Getty images
A landmark anti‑SLAPP judgment leaves important procedural questions unanswered, say Claudine Morgan, Hannah Gornall & Ellen Roberts
- Examines the first judicial application of the UK’s statutory anti-SLAPP regime under the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023, and the guidance it provides on identifying abusive litigation designed to suppress public interest speech.
- Considers the judgment’s practical and procedural implications, including the interaction between the new anti-SLAPP provisions and existing strike-out and summary judgment powers, and the case for wider reform.
The judgment handed down by Mrs Justice Collins Rice in Kamal v Tax Policy Associates Ltd and another [2026] EWHC 551 (KB) marked the first time the courts have applied the new anti-strategic litigation against public participation (SLAPP) power introduced by the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 (ECCTA 2023).
This article will address what this landmark judgment signals for future SLAPP-style claims; the potential complexities of the present statutory regime; practical implications; and whether further reform is needed.
Background
Mr Dan Neidle is a former solicitor, and now an award-winning journalist
