Mineral Sands Resources (Pty) Ltd and Others v Reddell and Others is a decision of the Constitutional Court of South Africa which affirmed a common law defence against strategic litigation against public participation (SLAPP) lawsuits.

[2] The appeals were consolidated for the purposes of the Constitutional Court's hearing, but were dealt with in separate judgements: Reddell and Others v Mineral Sands Resources (Pty) Ltd and Others (CCT 67/21) concerns the corporate defamation plea, and Mineral Sands Resources v Reddell concerns the SLAPP suit plea.

In a unanimous judgement written by Justice Steven Majiedt, the Constitutional Court agreed with the respondent that a SLAPP suit defence was provided for in the existing common law doctrine of abuse of process.

However, the court distinguished SLAPP suits from other forms of abuse of process, including frivolous and vexatious litigation and unlawful arrests.

In a typical SLAPP suit, the plaintiff does not necessarily expect to win its case, but will have accomplished its objective if the defendant yields to the intimidation, mounting legal costs or exhaustion and abandons its defence and also, importantly, its criticism of and opposition to the project or development.

It appears from this initial analysis that both merit and motive play a role in the test for a SLAPP suit and the one may inform the other.In this respect, the court struck a middle ground between the positions of the disputants: while the applicants argued that SLAPP suits should be identified and disposed with solely on the basis of their merits, the respondents submitted that the only criterion should be the motives of the plaintiff (and specifically the presence or absence of an ulterior purpose).