Regulatory
Anti-SLAPP
Definition
Legislation allowing early dismissal of litigation brought to silence public participation or speech on matters of public interest, often with costs awarded against the claimant.
Key takeaways
- Anti-SLAPP laws let a defendant seek early dismissal of a lawsuit brought to silence public participation on a matter of public interest.
- The claimant must show the case has merit far earlier than ordinary procedure requires, and costs may be awarded against it.
- Protection varies by jurisdiction, so the same claim may be dismissed early in one forum and run for years in another.
Why it matters
SLAPP stands for strategic lawsuit against public participation, meaning a claim whose purpose is the cost and delay it imposes rather than the remedy it seeks. Anti-SLAPP statutes let a defendant apply for dismissal at the outset, before the expense of full disclosure, and shift the burden to the claimant to show the case has merit.
The mechanism appears in gambling disputes wherever reputation and investigation meet. A company suing over a report about its conduct may face an anti-SLAPP application arguing the report concerned a matter of public interest; the claimant then has to demonstrate a probability of success far earlier than ordinary procedure requires.
Coverage is uneven. Protection is strong in some jurisdictions and absent in others, so the same claim may be dismissed early in one forum and proceed for years in another, which makes the choice of venue unusually consequential.
The bottom line
Anti-SLAPP laws test the purpose of a lawsuit before its merits. Where they apply, suing your critics becomes a decision with an early and expensive gate.
Sources
- Directive (EU) 2024/1069 on protecting persons who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded claims or abusive court proceedings - EUR-Lex, Publications Office of the European Union
Frequently asked questions
What is an anti-SLAPP law?
An anti-SLAPP law gives a defendant an early route to have a claim dismissed when it targets speech or public participation on a matter of public interest. SLAPP stands for strategic lawsuit against public participation, a claim brought for the cost and delay it imposes rather than the remedy it seeks. The claimant must show early on that the case has merit, and costs are often awarded against it if it fails.
Why do anti-SLAPP laws matter in gambling disputes?
Gambling companies sometimes sue over reporting, research or criticism of their conduct. Where anti-SLAPP protection applies, the defendant can argue at the outset that the publication concerned a matter of public interest, forcing the company to demonstrate a probability of success before full disclosure. That makes suing critics an early and potentially expensive decision, and makes the choice of forum unusually consequential.
Does the EU have an anti-SLAPP law?
Yes. Directive (EU) 2024/1069 protects people who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded claims or abusive court proceedings in civil matters with cross-border implications, including through early dismissal and remedies such as cost awards. Member States had to transpose it into national law by 7 May 2026. Protection in purely domestic cases still depends on each country's own rules, so coverage remains uneven.