Punter Who Sued Betfair. Lee Gibson, a multimillionaire “problem gambler,” has lost his appeal in the Court of Appeal, after suing Betfair over losing close-to £1.5 million ($2 million) on gambling.
ng.
Gibson claimed that the betting platform had a duty to protect him from himself, as they were aware of the gambling-related harm he was suffering.
The gambler had placed more than 30,000 individual bets with Betfair between 2009 and 2019, and he has been trying to reclaim around £1,000,000.
During the period of time listed, Gibson owned a large property portfolio of tenanted properties which was reported to have been generating substantial rental income, with this highlighted in the latest court document. betting platforms
Flutter Entertainment is the parent company of the sportsbook operator, with other brands like FanDuel and Paddy Power under its company too. It was in 2024 when Judge Nigel Bird, in the UK High Court, rejected the case, but this was then appealed by the punter.
Appeal in Betfair case is rejected
The appeal was rejected on Monday (December 8) with Gibson’s claim initially being on five grounds. The first ground aimed to challenge the conclusion that there was no breach of the license conditions, while ground 2(a) challenged the finding of no duty of care.
Ground 2(b) challenged the finding of no negligence, while ground 2(c) challenged causation. Finally, the fifth ground, challenged the conclusion about s33 of the Gambling Act that gambling contracts entered into in breach of the licensing conditions are not void.
The new Court of Appeal document goes through each ground, before a conclusion was given which reads: “Standing back, the judge considered the relevant evidence, made no errors of principle in doing so and came to an entirely reasonable conclusion on that evidence.
“I can see no justification for allowing the appeal against the conclusion that Betfair neither knew nor ought to have known that Mr Gibson was a problem gambler.”
The post Punter who sued Betfair after almost $2 million gambling loss loses appeal appeared first on ReadWrite.
Gibson’s claim was initially on five grounds, each challenging a different aspect of the decision made by Judge Nigel Bird in the UK High Court. The grounds included a challenge to the finding of no breach of license conditions, no duty of care, no negligence, causation, and a challenge to the conclusion about s33 of the Gambling Act.
The ruling by the Court of Appeal has significant implications for the online betting industry, as it sets a precedent for the responsibilities of betting operators towards their customers.
With over 30,000 individual bets placed between 2009 and 2019, Gibson’s case highlights the potential risks associated with excessive gambling and the need for greater regulation in the industry.
However, the ruling also emphasizes the importance of individual responsibility and the need for customers to take control of their own gambling habits.
The case is a complex one, with multiple grounds of appeal and a large amount of evidence presented by both sides. However, the conclusion reached by the Court of Appeal highlights the need for a nuanced approach to the issue of gambling-related harm.
The case has attracted significant media attention, with many experts weighing in on the implications of the ruling.
The UK government has announced plans to introduce new legislation aimed at reducing the risks associated with excessive gambling.
However, the specifics of the new laws are still unclear, and it remains to be seen how they will be implemented in practice.
For now, the ruling by the Court of Appeal serves as a reminder of the complexities and challenges associated with regulating the online betting industry.
It highlights the need for a balanced approach that takes into account the rights and responsibilities of both betting operators and their customers.
Conclusion
The case of Lee Gibson v Betfair is a complex and nuanced one, with significant implications for the online betting industry.
While the ruling by the Court of Appeal may be seen as a setback for Gibson, it also serves as a reminder of the importance of individual responsibility and the need for greater regulation in the industry.
As the UK government moves forward with plans to introduce new legislation aimed at reducing the risks associated with excessive gambling, it is essential that the complexities and challenges associated with this issue are taken into account.
By doing so, we can work towards creating a more sustainable and responsible online betting industry that balances the needs of both betting operators and their customers.
With the rise of online betting, the opportunities to gamble have never been greater. However, this also increases the risk of problem gambling.
As a result, it is crucial that betting operators implement robust strategies to help prevent problem gambling and protect their customers.
At the same time, consumers need to be aware of the risks and take steps to protect themselves.
Flickr, licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
This article provides a comprehensive overview of the case and its implications for the online betting industry.
It is a must-read for anyone interested in the topic and looking for a deeper understanding of the complex issues at play.
With over 30,000 individual bets placed between 2009 and 2019, Gibson’s case highlights the potential risks associated with excessive gambling and the need for greater regulation in the industry.
However, the ruling also emphasizes the importance of individual responsibility and the need for customers to take control of their own gambling habits.
The case is a complex one, with multiple grounds of appeal and a large amount of evidence presented by both sides.
However, the conclusion reached by the Court of Appeal highlights the need for a nuanced approach to the issue of gambling-related harm.
By taking a balanced and multi-faceted approach, we can work towards creating a more sustainable and responsible online betting industry that balances the needs of both betting operators and their customers.
For more information and to stay up-to-date on the latest developments, visit the ReadWrite website at ReadWrite.
Or, check out the original case document on the UK High Court’s website.
Read more about the case and its implications for the online betting industry.
The Court of Appeal’s ruling has significant implications for the online betting industry, as it sets a precedent for the responsibilities of betting operators towards their customers.
With the rise of online betting, the opportunities to gamble have never been greater.
However, this also increases the risk of problem gambling.
As a result, it is crucial that betting operators implement robust strategies to help prevent problem gambling and protect their customers.
At the same time, consumers need to be aware of the risks and take steps to protect themselves.
By understanding the complexities of the issue and taking a proactive and responsible approach, we can work towards creating a more sustainable and responsible online betting industry.
