MAJIEDT J matter. In respect of the merits, regard must first briefly be had to the well-established general approach to exceptions as they would apply to this case. Merits The approach to be adopted in respect of the exceptions [41] The excipient must satisfy the court that the conclusion of law pleaded by a defendant cannot be supported by any reasonable interpretation of the particulars of claim.36 In adjudicating an exception, the facts pleaded by the defendants must all be accepted as true.37 Applied to this case, it means that it must be accepted as true that the plaintiffs have not brought a defamation claim for a reasonable amount, likely to be recovered in order to compensate them for injury to dignity. Instead, they have brought a series of claims for amounts which they know they will not recover, in order to intimidate their critics, the environmentalists, into silence. What bears consideration next in brief is the SLAPP suit’s origin, nature, and development. The SLAPP suit – origin, nature, and development [42] As stated, the SLAPP suit has its origin in the United States of America and Canada. The term “SLAPP” originated in the 1980’s in the United States of America.38 Lawsuits of this kind are usually brought for the purpose of preventing or discouraging political expression and comment on public issues. Their objective is to limit protest and dissuade individuals, citizens and activists from political participation. There appears to be an increase in such cases, particularly in foreign jurisdictions like Canada and the United States of America, and they take a wide range of forms. They are often described as cases without merit brought to discourage a party from pursuing or vindicating their rights, often with the intention not necessarily to win the case, but 36 Stewart v Botha [2008] ZASCA 84; 2008 (6) SA 310 (SCA) at para 4. 37 Charlton v Parliament of the Republic of South Africa [2011] ZASCA 132; 2012 (1) SA 472 (SCA) at para 1. Canan and Pring “Studying Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation: Mixing Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches” (1988) 22 Law & Society Review 2; Canan “The SLAPP from, a Sociological Perspective” (1989) 7 Pace Environmental Law Review 23; Pring “SLAPPs: Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation” (1989) 7 Pace Environmental Law Review 3. 38 19