Call us today0800 160 1298
 
 

Advantage Litigation

Welcome to Advantage Litigation Services. We provide affordable access to commercial litigation.

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Tags
    Tags Displays a list of tags that have been used in the blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Team Blogs
    Team Blogs Find your favorite team blogs here.
  • Login
    Login Login form

£1m gambling claim against online bookmaker is dropped

Posted by on in Uncategorized
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 1010
  • Subscribe to this entry
  • Print

Prompting speculation in the UK gambling industry that a private settlement has been reached, a long running claim for unpaid winnings from a horse racing bet has recently been discontinued.

The claimant, Belfast student Megan McCann, had for the past two years been claiming £1m in unpaid winnings against leading online bookmaker Bet365. The claim stated that on 22nd June 2016, McCann had placed a stake of just under £25,000 on 12 horses running in races at Kempton Park, Naas and Bath. The bets, forming a combined total of 960 £13 each-way ‘Lucky 15s’ – were accepted by Bet365 and most were successful, in theory returning a payout totalling £984,833.

However, Bet365 – one of the UK’s largest online gambling platforms – subsequently refused to pay the winnings, claiming that the student, who was 19 at the time, was using funds for her stakes that were provided by a third party, a contravention of their terms and conditions. Bet365 also refused to refund the £25,000 stake.

After over two years of legal action, the case was formally discontinued by McCann’s legal team shortly before it was due to return to court in Belfast, a move prompting mixed reactions from punters in the UK. Some will be happy to assume that some of the winnings have been paid, but many will be disappointed that the robustness of a major bookmakers terms and conditions were not exposed and tested in court. So far, Bet365 has refused to comment on the case.

Do you need funding for a legal action? 

If you are thinking about suing another company but are worried about the costs of resolving the dispute or going to court, Advantage Litigation Services can help. We have vast experience navigating the different ways of funding commercial dispute resolution and are best placed to help you identify the most appropriate funding option and litigation protection that will best benefit you and your business. Click here to contact us or call 0800 160 1298 to discuss how we can help you manage the risks and find a funding option that works for you.

Get in touch

  1. Your Name(*)
    Please let us know your name.
  2. Your Email(*)
    Please let us know your email address.
  3. Company Name(*)
    Please write a subject for your message.
  4. Your Phone Number
    Invalid Input
  5. Message(*)
    Please let us know your message.
  6. Anti-Spam, please enter the characters shown
    Anti-Spam, please enter the characters shown
    Invalid Input

Latest News

  • Whilst Covid-19 may have forced many parts of society to slow down and re-think our approach to all aspects of our lives, recent comments by a number of High Court judges would seem to indicate that this is certainly not happening in civil and commercial litigation. The 3 judges have expressed their disquiet over the ever increasing pervasiveness of hostile and antagonistic approaches to litigation where every point, good or bad, is taken. In the case of Navigator Equities Ltd & Ors v Deripaska from July this year, Mr Justice Andrew Baker said that, in the 30 years in which he had worked in commercial dispute resolution: There has been a significant general increase in hostility and aggressiveness in the conduct of disputes…the taking of any and every point, good or bad, and other failures to display proper independence from the litigating... Read More

  • The UK’s largest ever group action litigation action, ostensibly valued at almost £5bn, has been thrown out by the High Court in London with the case having been found to be an abuse of process. The case, Municipio De Mariana & Ors v BHP Group Plc & Anor, involved tens of thousands of Brazilian claimants followed the collapse of the Fundao dam in south eastern Brazil in 2015. The collapse killed 19 people and the subsequent flood wiped out many settlements and villages in its path.High Court judge Mr Justice Turner agreed with the defendants in the case after finding that the court could not handle such a disparate and unmanageable case involving so many claimants. The case was brought by PGMBM, a trading name of Excello Law Limited, on behalf of over 202,000 individual, corporate and institutional claimants against two... Read More

  • A recent ruling by the High Court in London will mean that unsuccessful claimants in the well-publicised Municipio De Mariana & Ors v BHP Group PLC & Anor group action claim will need to make an interim payment of £8m to cover 50% of their opponents legal costs. In making the ruling, High Court judge Mr Justice Turner said that it was wrong to penalise the defendants for the work done on the case. Justice Turner had already struck out group litigation on behalf of some 202,600 Brazilians last November who were claiming compensation following the collapse of the Fundao dam in Brazil in 2015, saying the task of managing such a case would be ‘irredeemably unmanageable’ if it was allowed to proceed. Read More