SLAPP lawsuits in UK?
Discussion
Can any of the qualified minds explain the UK legal situation with regard to Strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) law suits?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_ag...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_ag...
Ace Face said:
What do you want to do? Pursue one or defend one?
I had to check wikipedia to see what that "type" of claim is.
Costs can be prohibitive, and it's a serious problem in civil and criminal courts alike.
Neither, mostly intellectual curiosity. I know it's an American thing, just wondered how it was handled in the UK.I had to check wikipedia to see what that "type" of claim is.
Costs can be prohibitive, and it's a serious problem in civil and criminal courts alike.
The Defamation Act 2013 was partly designed to stop legal bullying of people expressing reasonable opinion but anyone genuinely slandering or libelling individuals or organisations aren't shielded.
https://www.ft.com/content/374299f0-295a-11e5-acfb...
https://www.ft.com/content/374299f0-295a-11e5-acfb...
I get defamation, but SLAPP isn't about defamation, its purpose is silencing critics by suing them in bankrupting with legal costs not damages.
Defamation doesn't cover the situation below, which is what prompted the wondering. Given it is their own document it cannot be defamation and is clearly in the public interest as potential evidence of criminal wrong doing under election law. Undoubtedly they could 'buy' a judgement in the US, using one of the corporate friendly counties that import lawsuits.
But how would a UK court react?
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/14...
Defamation doesn't cover the situation below, which is what prompted the wondering. Given it is their own document it cannot be defamation and is clearly in the public interest as potential evidence of criminal wrong doing under election law. Undoubtedly they could 'buy' a judgement in the US, using one of the corporate friendly counties that import lawsuits.
But how would a UK court react?
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/14...
Edited by 4x4Tyke on Thursday 5th April 10:16
4x4Tyke said:
...
Given it is their own document it cannot be defamation and clearly in the public interest as evidence of criminal wrong doing. Undoubtedly they could buy a judgement in the US, using one of the corporate friendly counties.
...
Your opening post and the question above are not very clear. What document are you referring to? Given it is their own document it cannot be defamation and clearly in the public interest as evidence of criminal wrong doing. Undoubtedly they could buy a judgement in the US, using one of the corporate friendly counties.
...
4x4Tyke said:
I get defamation, but SLAPP isn't about defamation, its purpose is silencing critics by suing them in bankrupting with legal costs not damages.
Defamation doesn't cover the situation below, which is what prompted the wondering. Given it is their own document it cannot be defamation and is clearly in the public interest as potential evidence of criminal wrong doing under election law. Undoubtedly they could 'buy' a judgement in the US, using one of the corporate friendly counties that import lawsuits.
But how would a UK court react?
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/14...
a defamation claim is one of the most expensive to bring/defend, so it would be a common vehicle for this purpose. probably quite a good one tbh. Defamation doesn't cover the situation below, which is what prompted the wondering. Given it is their own document it cannot be defamation and is clearly in the public interest as potential evidence of criminal wrong doing under election law. Undoubtedly they could 'buy' a judgement in the US, using one of the corporate friendly counties that import lawsuits.
But how would a UK court react?
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/14...
Edited by 4x4Tyke on Thursday 5th April 10:16
Breadvan72 said:
Your opening post and the question above are not very clear. What document are you referring to?
I've edited the post above to try and clarify the situation and my wondering. I didn't want Brexit to cloud the discussion and cause noise in my initial post. The document is mentioned in the third paragraph of the linked article. theguardian said:
But the Observer has seen a confidential document that provides clear evidence of a link between the two campaigns. More precisely, evidence of a close working relationship between the two data analytics firms employed by the campaigns – AggregateIQ, which Vote Leave hired, and Cambridge Analytica, retained by Leave.EU.
This has resulted in legal threats over 'damages'.https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/86364319...
Edited by 4x4Tyke on Thursday 5th April 10:37
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff