SLAPP steht für „strategic lawsuit against public participation“. Anti-SLAPP ist die Verteidigung gegen SLAPP, sprich die Verteidigung gegen die Klage wegen z.B. Rufschädigung, obwohl der Beklagte z.B. nur von seinem Recht auf Meinungsfreiheit Gebrauch macht. Der Beklagte soll durch die Klage von dem Gebrauch solchen Rechtes unangemessen abgehalten werden. Mit der Anti-SLAPP Motion gibt dem solchermaßen Beklagten z.B der Kalifornische Staat eine starke Verteidigungswaffe in die Hand. Nachfolgend mehr …. Information Anti Slapp. Im übrigen findet sich ein aktueller Fall (Klage gegen die Siemens AG) , in welchem die Anti-Slapp Einrede erhoben wird, mit Datum 3.Juni 2010 im US-Rechtsblog www.gerichtsreporter.us.
The U.S. state of California enacted Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16 in 1992, a statute intended to frustrate SLAPPs by providing a quick and inexpensive defense. It provides for a special motion that a defendant can file at the outset of a lawsuit to strike a complaint when it arises from conduct that falls within the rights of petition or free speech. The statute expressly applies to any writing or speech made in connection with an issue under consideration or review by a legislative, executive, or judicial proceeding, or any other official proceeding authorized by law, but there is no requirement that the writing or speech be promulgated directly to the official body. It also applies to speech in a public forum about an issue of public interest and to any other petition or speech conduct about an issue of public interest.
To win an anti-SLAPP motion, the defendant must first show that the lawsuit is based on constitutionally protected activity. Then, the burden shifts to the plaintiff, to affirmatively present evidence to show that they have a reasonable probability of prevailing on the action. The filing of an anti-SLAPP motion stays all discovery. This feature acts to greatly reduce the cost of litigation to the anti-SLAPP defendant, and can make beating the motion extremely difficult for the plaintiff, because they effectively must prove their case without the benefit of discovery.
Interessante Webseite zum Thema „Defamation“ in Kalifornien: http://www.defamationlawblog.com/2009/11/articles/antislapp/the-california-antislapp-statute/
