Introduction
In recent years, increasing concern has been voiced about the use of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation – commonly known as SLAPPs – as a tactic to silence critics, particularly journalists, academics, and campaigners. SLAPPs are seen as a misuse of legal procedures, typically initiated by powerful individuals or corporations to intimidate those exposing wrongdoing. In the UK, this practice has become a growing issue, with the legal profession’s role under increasing scrutiny. In response, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has sought to clarify and strengthen its stance.
On 24 March 2025, the SRA issued a fresh public statement reaffirming and expanding its position on SLAPPs, particularly in light of recent criticism following its decision not to take enforcement action in the high-profile Discreet Law case. This statement marks a significant moment in the development of the regulator’s approach and offers new insight into how the SRA sees its role in tackling abusive litigation.
Understanding SLAPPs
SLAPPs are civil claims (often framed as defamation, privacy, or data protection claims) brought not necessarily to succeed on legal merits, but to burden the defendant with legal costs and processes. Even if unlikely to prevail in court, such claims can exert a chilling effect on public interest journalism and whistleblowing. They are, in essence, a form of legal intimidation.
Globally, and increasingly in the UK, SLAPPs are associated with attempts to suppress media reports on corruption, human rights abuses, or the activities of authoritarian regimes. This has prompted strong calls for both legal reform and greater scrutiny of the conduct of lawyers involved in these cases.
The Legal Profession’s Role
Solicitors are bound by professional duties to act with integrity, not to misuse their position, and to support the rule of law. Where legal professionals are perceived to be facilitating SLAPPs—whether by threatening aggressive and unfounded litigation, sending misleading legal correspondence, or failing to challenge dubious client instructions—there are clear concerns about breaches of these core obligations.
The SRA, as the regulator of solicitors and law firms in England and Wales, plays a central role in enforcing these standards. It has been actively engaging with the issue of SLAPPs, updating its guidance and pursuing enforcement action where appropriate.
The February 2024 SLAPPs Statement
In February 2024, the SRA published a statement noting it had over 40 active investigations into potential SLAPP-type conduct. It emphasised that solicitors must not be complicit in efforts to stifle legitimate criticism or reporting. It reaffirmed that ethical legal practice requires more than loyalty to the client—it requires scrutiny of client motives and instructions, and a commitment to legal processes that serve justice, not suppression.
Paul Philip, the SRA’s Chief Executive, stated at the time:
“Lawyers should never use their position to intimidate others or frustrate legitimate scrutiny… They are not only damaging the reputation of the profession but undermining the rule of law.”
The March 2025 Clarification: Discreet Law and Beyond
However, in March 2025, following criticism over its decision not to discipline Discreet Law in a complaint linked to defamation claims brought on behalf of individuals associated with Russian mercenary group Wagner, the SRA issued a detailed clarification. The complaint alleged that the firm had facilitated abusive litigation intended to deter reporting about Mr Prigozhin’s links to Wagner.
In its statement, the SRA acknowledged that “concerns remain about solicitors getting involved in abusive litigation aimed at silencing legitimate criticism”, but it defended its handling of the Discreet Law case. After a careful review of the evidence, the regulator concluded that the firm had not acted improperly.
The SRA used the moment to articulate several key principles underpinning its overall approach to SLAPPs:
-
- The courts have the primary role in identifying and striking out SLAPPs and in shielding parties from the consequences of such litigation.
- The SRA’s role is distinct: it is not concerned with whether a claim is labelled a SLAPP, but whether the solicitor has acted properly and ethically.
- Solicitors must ensure that any case they pursue is “properly arguable”, meaning it has a legal and factual foundation worthy of being tested in court.
- If a solicitor fails to critically assess client instructions or pursues claims without a sound basis, they may face regulatory action.
- However, a solicitor acting competently and in good faith could still be used by a client to further an abusive claim—this alone would not justify enforcement action unless there is a clear breach of professional standards.
- Importantly, the SRA reiterated its belief that legislative reform is the best long-term solution to combating SLAPPs, calling for more robust powers for courts to strike out vexatious cases.
Ongoing Investigations and Enforcement
The SRA stressed that it remains committed to enforcement where solicitors cross ethical boundaries. In 2024, it successfully prosecuted a solicitor before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT), securing a £50,000 fine for improperly seeking to prevent publication of correspondence.
The regulator also revealed that further cases are under investigation, with one more set to be heard before the SDT and four others nearing decisions on next steps.
These actions reinforce the SRA’s position that, while not all claims labelled SLAPPs necessarily indicate misconduct by lawyers, the regulator will act decisively where abuse of process or misuse of legal threats is found.
Balancing Act: Ethics, Representation and the Public Interest
For solicitors, the SRA’s evolving approach is a reminder of the fine line between zealous representation and unethical conduct. While legal professionals are entitled to act for controversial clients, they are not entitled to misuse the legal system on their behalf. The duty to act in the client’s best interests does not override the duty to the court and the public interest.
Firms should ensure that they have robust internal processes to assess the merits of potential claims and scrutinise client motives. Where there is doubt about the propriety of a case, solicitors are expected to decline instructions.
Conclusion
The SRA’s March 2025 statement marks an important evolution in its approach to SLAPPs. While reaffirming its commitment to ethical legal practice, the regulator has also clarified the boundaries of its remit and its reliance on judicial processes to identify and manage abusive litigation. By doing so, it aims to strike a careful balance: taking action where solicitors act improperly, while respecting the right to legal representation and due process.
For the legal profession, this serves as both a warning and a guide. Ethical representation must never veer into enabling abuse. The integrity of the profession—and public confidence in it—depends on maintaining that distinction.
See the SRA Warning Notice of 31 May 2024