SRA “should ask KC” to review approach to SLAPPs


Wilson: Post-mortem needed

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) should consider commissioning an independent KC to review its approach to prosecuting SLAPPs, a leading media lawyer has argued.

Iain Wilson, managing partner of London firm Brett Wilson, said there need to be a “post-mortem of the regulatory assault on media lawyers” that took place under previous SRA chief executive Paul Philip’s watch.

“Under him, the SRA appears to have responded to sustained pressure from campaigners and media organisations suggesting the existence of a SLAPP crisis,” he said.

Writing on Legal Futures, Mr Wilson – vice-chair of the Society of Media Lawyers – said complaints against media lawyers were “effectively encouraged” by the regulator.

“The triaging of complaints was ineffective or absent, with opportunistic litigants in person and media organisations weaponising the complaints regime. The volume of investigations [numbering 50 at one point] was then cited as evidence of a wider SLAPP problem.

He accused the SRA of undermining the rule of law by damaging the reputation of media lawyers and media law more generally “simply for exercising their clients’ rights”.

Three high-profile SLAPP prosecutions by the SRA have failed in recent months and Mr Wilson noted that in the High Court ruling earlier this year overturning the findings against Osborne Clarke partner Ashley Hurst, the judge asked whether the SRA “succumbed to pressure from campaigners – what Collins Rice J describes as ‘background noise’”.

He said independent academic research commissioned by the Society of Media Lawyers found the evidence of a UK SLAPP problem to be “inaccurate and misleading”.

“There is a danger that campaigners may be seeking to use the so-called SLAPP ‘crisis’ as a means of softening defamation law by the backdoor. Defamation law was overhauled in 2013 and a stronger and broad public interest defence was introduced. There is no bar to publishing properly researched public interest journalism.

“Following the three failed SRA prosecutions, the regulator should now pause and review its approach, perhaps commissioning an independent KC to review the basis upon which these prosecutions were brought.

“A further review should be carried out of outstanding SLAPP investigations. In the meantime, lawyers should be able to represent clients without worrying that properly conducted litigation will attract regulatory sanction.




Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog


The SRA needs to admit it got it wrong about SLAPPs

The High Court judgment in Ashley Hurst v SRA in January raises serious questions about the regulator’s approach to allegations of SLAPP-like behaviour.


Why menopause support belongs on every law firm’s agenda

Progression in the law slows significantly as women approach senior leadership. Most will be at the height of their careers around the average age menopause symptoms begin.


Law firms need to go beyond document checks

At the root of every failed compliance review is a familiar phrase: a calm assertion of “but we did a document check”.


Loading animation