We use cookies where necessary to allow us to understand how people interact with our website and content, so that we can continue to improve our service.
Good Law Project is powered by people across the UK
Donate now
Case overview
The High Court has dismissed the £8m defamation claim brought against journalist Dan Neidle, branding it “spectacularly inflated” and intentionally “oppressive”.
The claim, brought by barrister Setu Kamal, related to an article by tax law expert Dan Neidle which criticised Kamal’s involvement in a dodgy tax avoidance scheme.
The court found that Setu’s claim was “spectacularly inflated”, in parts “unarguable” and “oppressive” and “was intended to, and did, have a chilling effect on” Dan’s journalism. The court also said Setu had abused the court’s processes.
Our application was the first under new anti-SLAPP legislation. SLAPPs are strategic lawsuits against public participation. That law protects those who speak truth to power from abusive lawsuits. As a result, the judgment is precedent setting – it will inform others who face abusive defamation claims on how they can use this new law to defend themselves.
Part of campaign:
Defending the right to free speech
If free speech means anything, it is the right to speak hard truths to those with power