Hurst: Actions were not a SLAPP, says tribunal
The solicitor accused of trying to improperly restrict publication of an email he sent to a high-profile lawyer over the affairs of former Conservative MP Nadeem Zahawi, has been fined £50,000.
Ashley Hurst, a litigation partner and head of client strategy at Osborne Clarke, has also been ordered to pay a huge costs bill, by the standards of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT), of £260,000.
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) had sought £298,000, likely to reflect the amount of legal activity that went on before the case reached the tribunal.
The case has been painted as the first before the SDT to concern a SLAPP (strategic litigation against public participation) but president Alison Kellett, chairing the panel, said this afternoon that they did not consider it to be one.
“Clearly the issues touch on the wider SLAPPs debate but here there was no attempt to prevent scrutiny of Mr Zahawi’s tax affairs per se,” she said.
“On the documentary evidence, Mr Hurst was not seeking to stop Mr Neidle from asking questions based on facts as he saw them. Meanwhile, the mainstream press were already reporting on the issue of Mr Zahawi’s tax affairs and continued to do so.”
Former Clifford Chance partner Dan Neidle, who runs Tax Policy Associates, was writing about the tax affairs of the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, Nadeem Zahawi, who stood down at this year’s election.
In July 2022, in response to tweets that accused Mr Zahawi of providing unsatisfactory answers, Mr Neidle received letters from Mr Hurst asking him to withdraw his claims.
Mr Neidle published the letters, which he said were “designed to intimidate” him. Osborne Clarke had also sought to assert they were without prejudice and/or confidential and that publication of them would be “improper”.
In response to an initial direct message on X, Mr Neidle had also made clear that he did not accept ‘without prejudice’ correspondence.
Mr Neidle then referred Mr Hurst and Osborne Clarke to the SRA in November 2022 after it published its SLAPPs warning notice, on the basis that the correspondence “bears several of the hallmarks of SLAPPs which are identified in your warning notice”.
Following a hearing this week, the SDT found proven the allegation that Mr Hurst sent Mr Neidle an email that “improperly attempted to restrict Mr Neidle’s right to publish that e-mail and/or discuss its contents”. This both damaged public trust in the profession and demonstrated a lack of integrity, it found.
Writing on X after the decision was announced, but before the sanction, Mr Neidle said: “The idea that a lawyer can send a libel threat to someone, and require them never to tell anyone about it, is both dangerous and absurd. The SDT reached the right decision.
“But Zahawi can’t blame his lawyers for this. Even if it was proper behaviour for a solicitor (it wasn’t) it was improper and undemocratic for a cabinet minister.”
An SRA spokesman said: “We will need to await the full written judgment, but welcome this decision.”
An Osborne Clarke spokeswoman said: “We are extremely surprised and disappointed with this outcome in light of the legal position and evidence heard at the tribunal. We will await the detailed reasons of the tribunal before commenting further.”
The tribunal’s full reasons will be published in the coming weeks.
Leave a Comment