The acronym SLAPP, representing Strategic Lawsuit (or Litigation) Against Public Participation, is generally used to describe an abuse of process by the rich and powerful in order to intimidate and deter conduct in the public interest, such as investigative journalism.

Media claims such as defamation, misuse of private information and breach of privacy or data protection are typically relied upon to justify conduct such as letters before action, the issuing of proceedings,  applications for injunctions and the like, whose intention is primarily to prevent investigation and to silence criticism by writers, reporters, academics and others.

Criticism of SLAPPs has led to calls for preventive measures, including more robust pre-trial case management and better regulatory intervention. A number of egregious examples have been reported and condemned in the press and the matter discussed in Parliament.

However, there is also a risk of the term being used pejoratively (as with terms such as “libel tourism” and “forum shopping”) to tarnish a genuine claim by an unsympathetic litigant, or to tarnish the reputation of lawyers acting for unsympathetic clients.

In March 2022 the Secretary of State for Justice published a Call for Evidence on reforms to tackle the issue, and the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) released updated guidance on “Conduct in Disputes” which specifically focused on SLAPPs. In November 2022 the SRA issued a Warning Notice on SLAPPS. In February 2023, the SRA published a thematic review, echoing the message in its earlier guidance, but also confirming that it had not found any genuine examples of SLAPPS in its file review. This suggests the problem, though real enough for those affected in a small number of cases, may be less widespread than feared.