Parallel legislation to tackle SLAPPs introduced in both Houses of Parliament

Max Thompson, Campaigns Officer

19 June 2026

Two parallel pieces of legislation have been introduced in the House of Lords and the House of Commons this week in an effort to tackle lawsuits designed to "silence, intimidate or financially exhaust" journalists.

The private members' bills — anti-SLAPP legislation — were introduced by Baroness Stowell of Beeston and Sir John Whittingdale MP on Tuesday and Wednesday respectively, in a rare example of cross-chamber cooperation to tackle strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs).

SLAPPs are aggressive legal actions designed to intimidate defendants and drive up their costs. They are generally brought by wealthy litigants — often large corporations — to prevent media organisations and authors from publishing damaging revelations.

The FSU has long opposed SLAPPs, which even the Solicitors Regulation Authority defines as "a misuse of the legal system, through bringing or threatening claims that are unmeritorious or characterised by abusive tactics, in order to stifle lawful scrutiny and publication."

Anti-SLAPP campaigners have described them as "abusive legal threats that are not necessarily intended to win in court, but rather to silence, intimidate or financially exhaust those speaking out in the public interest." They argue that this week's move in Parliament reflects mounting pressure to act after years of broken promises and inaction.

These lawsuits are associated with defamation threats and are frequently deployed against individual journalists and publishers alike. They are also used by powerful actors — predominantly large corporations — to silence campaigners, whistleblowers, and victims of crime, including victims of sexual abuse, as well as members of online communities who find themselves unable to mount a defence owing to costs, keeping damaging information out of the public domain.

The Anti-SLAPP Coalition has claimed that Britain is the leading jurisdiction for such litigation, with more instances of SLAPPs than the European Union and the United States combined.

Baroness Stowell's bill would give judges the power to assess these cases swiftly and "dispose of SLAPPs at the earliest possible stage in the court proceedings." Under the proposed law, judges would be required to balance a claimant's access to justice against the public interest in the matter at hand.

Ministers have repeatedly failed to tackle the issue despite committing to do so.

SLAPPs are widely seen as a threat to freedom of speech. Baroness Stowell has argued that "for too long British courts have been used to hush up unethical behaviour and corporate abuses," and that the "attack on free speech represented by SLAPPs is a stain on our legal system and a threat to a functioning democracy."

The bill sponsored by Sir John Whittingdale in the Commons would introduce the same proposed changes.

The Free Speech Union warmly welcomes the introduction of both bills, which would dramatically curb the use of SLAPPs.

Read more in The Times.