A former Clifford Chance partner has written to the Solicitors Regulatory Authority calling on the body to update its guidance on ‘SLAPP’ (strategic suit against public participation) after he was threatened with legal action by the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s lawyers in United Kingdom Nadeem Zahawi.
AND Needlewho left Clifford Chance in April after 24 years with the firm to found the not-for-profit Tax Policy Associates, posted letters sent to him by law firm Osborne Clarke on Zahawi’s behalf.
The letters were sent in response to a series of posts written by Neidle about Zahawi’s tax issues.
In response to a post In relation to Zahawi’s family’s role in providing capital for his founding of the polling company YouGov, Neidle received a letter from Osborne Clarke which included the paragraph: “…our client considers that you have crossed the line today by accused him of lying to the media and the public. in explaining his father’s contribution to YouGov.”
The letter – later made public on Twitter by Neidle – was headed “Confidential and without prejudice” and warned the former Clifford Chance partner “you have no right to publish [this email] or refer to it otherwise than for the purposes of seeking legal advice”.
Today, Neidle has written to the SRA to specifically request “an end to the practice of solicitors sending defamatory letters demanding that claims of wrongdoing be withdrawn, but insisting that the letters are confidential and cannot be published, or not even be mentioned”.
IN instruction posted on its website in March this year, the SRA mentions that misconduct can arise from “sending overly legalistic letters intended to intimidate particularly unrepresented or lay parties”.
In his letter published on Monday, Neidle urges that the SRA’s guidance “particularly cautions against assertions of confidentiality or ‘no bias’ which do not have a strong legal basis”.
Speaking to Law.com International, Neidle said SLAPPs were a “huge problem” and that “the goal is either to scare people or raise costs they can’t afford.”
He added that if he were still in commercial practice, the decision to go public with the papers would be more difficult, as he would be concerned about the reputational impact on the firm.
A spokesman for Osborne Clarke said: “We do not comment on customer matters.”
