A PUNTER who lost nearly £100,000 on a single bet on Celtic has been refused permission to take the bookmakers to court after they said he placed the bet wrongly and kept his money.
Lawyers for Gordon Shearer went to the Court of Session seeking a judicial review of the decision by Gibraltar-based bookmakers Betvictor not to pay him the £97,613.56 he says he is due – his stake plus the £5,137.56 he “won” at odds of 1-18.
The gambler’s application for judicial review also involved the Independent Betting Adjudication Service (IBAS) Ltd.
IBAS backed Betvictor, the Gibraltar Gambling Commission, and its Gambling Commissioner over the decision not to pay out on the bet, which was placed on Celtic against Kilmarnock in 2011.
Shearer said the bet was for the whole 90 minutes, but Betvictor said it was a bet only on the outcome of the second half of the match which Celtic won 2-1, though it was just 1-1 for the second 45 minutes.
Betting on the results of match “halves” has become commonplace as the bookmaking industry meets the demands of punters for more markets in football – the fastest growing sport for betting.
A lawyer for the punter told the court the case had been delayed because he “had exhausted his funds pursuing the issue in Gibraltar and did not have the resources to privately fund an action in Scotland” and he had sought legal aid.
Rejecting the application for a judicial review, judge Lord Boyd of Duncansby said that it had not been demonstrated that the Court of Session had jurisdiction over a company and a process based in England “even if the effects are felt in Scotland.”
Lord Boyd said: “It is a company incorporated in England and having its place of business in England. The adjudication was carried out in England.”
He added the review had “no real prospects of success” and that even if it proceeded, the punter “would face some formidable hurdles.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here