Key Moments:
- The High Court rejected Lee Gibson’s claim against Betfair, dismissing the notion of a duty of care.
- Gibson has taken his £1.5 million loss case to the Court of Appeal, alleging Betfair failed to act on signs of excessive gambling.
- The outcome of the case could impact legal expectations for betting operators regarding problem gamblers, including high-value clients.
Background of the Dispute
Lee Gibson, a 47-year-old property tycoon from Leeds, England, lost £1.5 million on Betfair over a ten-year period by placing over 30,000 soccer bets on the platform. After Betfair suspended his account in 2019, Gibson initiated legal action in September 2021, asserting that the company should have identified signs of his gambling issues and taken steps to intervene.
High Court Decision and Reasoning
Justice Nigel Bird dismissed the claim in November 2024, pointing out that Gibson never disclosed to Betfair that he had a gambling issue. According to Bird, Gibson had reassured Betfair staff that he was in control and that his losses were manageable due to his financial status as a multimillionaire. The financial information submitted by Gibson was deemed accurate, and the scale of losses did not appear objectively alarming. The judge concluded there was no duty of care since Gibson neither requested formal limits nor entered a self-exclusion program. Bird stated, “A successful gambler should not be deprived of the fruits of his bet, but equally in my judgment, a losing gambler should not be able to escape the consequences of his decisions.”
Man who blew £1.5m gambling on football sues Betfair in landmark fight https://t.co/jV3s37B20I
Money Back really 😀
— Richardlewisevans (@dickieevans1) October 9, 2025
Arguments Presented in the Appeal
Gibson has now escalated his case to the Court of Appeal. His attorney, Yash Kulkarni KC, argued that the lower court misjudged the situation. Kulkarni insisted, “The judge ought to have found that Betfair knew or ought to have known that Mr Gibson was likely to be a problem gambler throughout the material time of the claim and his finding otherwise was plainly wrong.” He also pointed out, “Mr Gibson placed at least 20,000 individual bets in the six years prior to 22 January 2021, which is more than five per day,” and maintained that persistent, high-volume betting funded at least partly by liquidating business assets suggests a likely gambling problem. Kulkarni argued the judge should have recognized these warning signs.
Implications for the Industry
The progress and result of this appeal are attracting significant industry attention. The ruling could shape how betting operators are expected to monitor and respond to customer behavior for indications of problem gambling, particularly among high-value players.
| Event | Date/Period | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Gambling Activity | 2009 – 2019 | Gibson placed over 30,000 soccer bets on Betfair’s exchange |
| High Court Claim | September 2021 | Gibson initiated suit alleging Betfair’s failure to intervene |
| High Court Dismissal | November 2024 | Justice Bird rejected the claim, citing lack of duty and disclosure |
| Court of Appeal Proceedings | Not specified | Appeal underway, challenging the previous decision and Betfair’s responsibilities |
- Author
Daniel Williams
