SRA Should Commission KC to Review SLAPPs Approach, Media Lawyer Argues
Summary
Iain Wilson, managing partner of Brett Wilson and vice-chair of the Society of Media Lawyers, has argued the Solicitors Regulation Authority should commission an independent KC to review its approach to prosecuting SLAPPs. Wilson says complaints against media lawyers were 'effectively encouraged' by the SRA, with the triaging of complaints described as 'ineffective or absent'. Three high-profile SLAPP prosecutions by the SRA have failed in recent months, including the High Court ruling overturning findings against Ashley Hurst of Osborne Clarke. Wilson said the regulator should now 'pause and review its approach'.
“The triaging of complaints was ineffective or absent, with opportunistic litigants in person and media organisations weaponising the complaints regime.”
About this source
The Inner Temple Library is one of the four Inns of Court library services in London. Their Current Awareness blog is staffed by professional law librarians who scan the day's English legal news, court judgments, regulatory updates, parliamentary questions, and academic commentary, and post short summaries with links to the source. Around 185 posts a month. The blog has been the standard daily-read for English barristers, solicitors, and law librarians for over a decade because of the editorial filtering: the librarians read more than any practitioner could, and they post only what matters. Watch this if you practice English law, manage a UK firm's research team, or want a curated daily feed of UK legal and regulatory news.
What changed
The article reports on Iain Wilson's argument that the SRA should commission an independent KC to review its approach to SLAPPs, citing three failed prosecutions and an allegedly flawed complaints-triage process that weaponised the regulatory regime against media lawyers. The piece references the High Court ruling in Ashley Hurst v SRA where Collins Rice J questioned whether the SRA 'succumbed to pressure from campaigners'. Wilson further cites independent academic research commissioned by the Society of Media Lawyers finding evidence of a UK SLAPP problem to be 'inaccurate and misleading'. Affected legal professionals and law firms should note that the SRA is facing external scrutiny over its enforcement approach to SLAPPs, which may inform future regulatory expectations and defence strategies in similar matters.
Archived snapshot
Apr 24, 2026GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.
SRA “should ask KC” to review approach to SLAPPs
23 April 2026 Posted by Neil Rose
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.
Sign up to our free e-newsletter
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. Name *
Email *
Comment *
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Blog
23 April 2026
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.
Read More More Blogs 22 April 2026
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.
Read More More Blogs 20 April 2026
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”.
Upcoming Webinars
- 24/04/2026 ### Children, wills and trusts: defining beneficiaries and managing risk
- 28/04/2026 ### Avoiding and resolving neighbour disputes
28/04/2026
Exempt lifetime transfers
Conferences
Claims Futures Conference 2026
Related News
Call to shift “modest” solicitor-client costs disputes from court to LeO
SRA unveils plan for beefed-up continuing competence regime
Exclusive: CA clarifies Mazur ruling after Law Society application
Leading national firm fined £160k for accounts rule breaches
The drama is over – no Mazur appeal
Features
After Mazur, is bad supervision really a criminal offence?
- ### Flat roof developments: legal disputes and strategic representation
- ### Mazur – a problem 300 years in the making
Associate News
- ### LexisNexis and Luminance announce strategic alliance
- ### Clio Work is now available to all solo, small, and mid-sized law firms
- ### Personal injury damage calculations and the static myth: The impact of economic influences on future losses
- ### Would you buy legal advice from someone who has never practised law?
- ### Are you one of the 48%? When housing disrepair becomes a compensation case
- ### 35% of managers lack confidence on neurodiversity adjustments as tribunal cases hit five-year high
- ### Is legal AI becoming ‘mandatory’ in criminal law? More Stories ## Associates
#### Financial & Legal #### Lockton Companies LLP #### LPG #### SearchFlow #### Verisk #### National Accident Law #### OneAdvanced #### Osprey Approach #### Checkboard #### Ignite Specialty Risk #### Dye & Durham #### Qanooni #### SOS Legal #### DG Legal #### Nexa Law #### Landmark Information Group #### LexisNexis Enterprise Solutions #### Fenchurch Legal #### Actionstep #### Fraser and Fraser #### R&R Solutions #### Miller Insurance Services LLP #### Legmark #### Litera #### Linetime #### Valid8 IP #### CEL Solicitors #### Allianz Legal Protection #### DR Solicitors #### InfoTrack #### Clio #### Document Direct #### Internet Erasure Ltd #### OneSearch Direct #### O'Connors #### Acquira Professional Services #### Access Legal #### Legal intelligence from LexisNexis® #### ARAG #### National Claims #### VinciWorks #### Bundledocs #### BigHand #### Stridon #### Search Acumen #### LexisNexis®InterAction® #### Express Solicitors #### Conscious Solutions #### National Accident Helpline #### Brabners #### LEAP Legal Software #### Recovery First Limited #### Perfect Portal #### AxiaFunder #### iCOFA #### tmGroup #### Auto Claims Assist #### Temple Legal Protection
Sign-up for our e‑newsletter
Get our news roundup every Friday.
Email * Sign-up here Services Directory Advertise Become an Associate
Parties
Related changes
Get daily alerts for Inner Temple Library Current Awareness
Daily digest delivered to your inbox.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime.
About this page
Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission
Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from Legal Futures.
The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.
Classification
Who this affects
Taxonomy
Browse Categories
Get alerts for this source
We'll email you when Inner Temple Library Current Awareness publishes new changes.
Subscribed!
Optional. Filters your digest to exactly the updates that matter to you.