SLAPP-ИСК  КАК  ТЕХНОЛОГИЯ  «ПРАВОВОГО  ЗАПУГИВАНИЯ»

Anastasia Andreevna SELKOVA

doi:10.33184/pravgos-2024.3.11

Authors

Anastasia Andreevna SELKOVA Ural State Law University named after V.F. Yakovlev

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33184/pravgos-2024.3.11

Keywords:

abuse of right, civil society, accessibility of information, public scrutiny, freedom of expression, defamation

Abstract

The article explores the category of «SLAPP lawsuit», which encompasses claims against public activists who raise issues of high political or social significance. SLAPP lawsuits are filed to stop critical speech, intimidate individuals who know about violations of law and abuse of rights. Through litigation, SLAPP claimants dismiss discussions of corporate social responsibility and disguise their own bad faith claims as valid civil law claims. The author sets the purposes of determining the key properties that identify SLAPP lawsuits, their impact on the processes of functioning and development of civil society, and establishing the specifics of procedural tactics used by SLAPP claimants. The methodological basis of the research consists of the method of comparative jurisprudence, analysis, synthesis and the special-legal method. The study concludes that SLAPP lawsuits have a negative impact on access to information in civil society and on the possibility of exercising the right to freedom of expression. In addition, the author specifies the main features of SLAPP lawsuits: justification by reference to non-existent factual circumstances and the use of ambiguous provisions of law interpretation. The study reveals that SLAPP claimants often resort to the tactics of procedural burdensome litigation, making it an excessively costly and resource-intensive process aimed solely at exhausting the resources of the other party and intimidating it.

Author Biography

Anastasia Andreevna SELKOVA , Ural State Law University named after V.F. Yakovlev

Candidate of Sciences (Law), Assistant Professor of the Department of Civil Procedure

References

Canan P. Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation / P. Canan, G. Pring // Social Problems. – 1988. – № 5. – P. 506–519.

Deming R. The Big Chill: Are Public Participation Rights Being Slapp-Ed? / R. Deming // Pace Environmental Law Review. – 2023. – № 2. – P. 315–356.

Smartt U. Media law for journalists / U. Smartt. – SAGE Publications, 2006. – 336 p.

Ting M. Whistleblowing / M. Ting // The American Political Science Review. – 2008. – № 2. – P. 249–267.

Canan P. SLAPPs: Getting Sued for Speaking Out / P. Canan, G. Pring. – Temple University Press, 1996. – 296 p.

Pring G. SLAPPs: Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation / Pring G. // Pace Environmental Law Journal. – 1989. – № 1. – P. 7–8.

Merk L. Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation in the Age of Online Speech: The Relevance of Anti-SLAPP and Anti-CyberSLAPP Legislation / L. Merk // The University of Cincinnati Intellectual Property and Computer Law Journal. – 2021. – № 1. – P. 2–27.

Swan S. Running Interference: Local Government, Tortious Interference with Contractual Relations, and the Constitutional Right to Petition // Journal of Land Use & Environmental Law. – 2020. – № 1. – P. 57–90.

Gowder P. The Rule of Law in the Real World / P. Gowder. – Temple University Press, 2016. – 275 p.

Saner K. Getting SLAPP-ed in Federal Court: Applying State Anti-SLAPP Special Motions to Dismiss in Federal Court After Shady Grove / K. Saner // Duke Law Journal. – 2013. – № 3. – P. 781–822.

Daday C. (Anti)-SLAPP Happy in Federal Court? The Applicability of State Anti-SLAPP Statutes in Federal Court and the Need for Federal Protection against SLAPPs / C. Daday // Catholic University Law Review. – 2021. – № 3. – P. 441–468.

O'Neill J. The Citizen Participation Act of 2009: Federal Legislation as an Effective Defense against SLAPPs / J. O'Neill // Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review. – 2011. – № 2. – P. 477–507.

Ernst B. Fighting SLAPPS in Federal Court: Erie, the Rules Enabling Act, and the Application of State anti-SLAPP Laws in Federal Diversity Actions / B. Ernst // Boston College Law Review. – 2015. – № 3. – P. 1181–1215.