William Hill goes to battle with Betfair customers over levy
Found this comment out there: -
Even if they could argue for it I think they have done their maths wrong. The PC has done a lot of damage to bigger users as well, so it's not a viable thing in the scheme of things. Reading between the lines its more a case of trying to put Betfair out of business by the look of it.Hills and the BHA have to persuade an impartial judge that the Levy Board was wrong to approach the consultation impartially, and wrong to listen to its own expert legal advisers.
-
JollyGreen
- Posts: 2047
- Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:06 am
Billy Hill has been out to get Betfair since the day they became successful. They assumed the idea would fail but when that didn't happen they have been trying to make things difficult ever since. I heard from a well informed source that there isn't a week goes by without Billy Hill issuing a legal challenge!
Mark Davis dialogue is pretty revealing on the machinations of the court case: -
http://www.markxdavies.com/2012/07/20/n ... ut-to-bed/
http://www.markxdavies.com/2012/07/20/n ... ut-to-bed/
Betfair wins William Hill Judicial Review
In a unanimous ruling, the Court of Appeal today found in favour of Betfair in the Judicial Review brought by William Hill, which concerned the Horserace Levy Board’s treatment of betting exchange customers.
The High Court had previously ruled in favour of the position of Betfair as supported by the Levy Board in July 2012, confirming the outcome of the extensive Consultation the Board itself undertook in 2010-2011. That Consultation clearly determined that customers of betting exchanges are not liable to pay the Horserace Betting Levy.
William Hill, whose online business remains Britain’s largest non-levy paying bookmaker, has decided not to seek leave to appeal today’s decision.
William Hill is liable for 50% of Betfair’s legal costs in defending the appeal, in addition to 25% of the costs of the initial hearing.
Martin Cruddace, Betfair’s Corporate and Legal Affairs Director said:
"We are very pleased that our arguments have, yet again, prevailed in a unanimous verdict of the Court of Appeal and that winning customers, uniquely welcome at Betfair, now have this clarity. It is obviously sensible that William Hill have decided not to seek leave to appeal."
"It remains unfortunate that the seven figure costs incurred by the Levy Board in defending William Hill’s litigation have had a direct and significant impact on prize money. William Hill Online remains by far Britain’s largest non-levy paying bookmaker".
In a unanimous ruling, the Court of Appeal today found in favour of Betfair in the Judicial Review brought by William Hill, which concerned the Horserace Levy Board’s treatment of betting exchange customers.
The High Court had previously ruled in favour of the position of Betfair as supported by the Levy Board in July 2012, confirming the outcome of the extensive Consultation the Board itself undertook in 2010-2011. That Consultation clearly determined that customers of betting exchanges are not liable to pay the Horserace Betting Levy.
William Hill, whose online business remains Britain’s largest non-levy paying bookmaker, has decided not to seek leave to appeal today’s decision.
William Hill is liable for 50% of Betfair’s legal costs in defending the appeal, in addition to 25% of the costs of the initial hearing.
Martin Cruddace, Betfair’s Corporate and Legal Affairs Director said:
"We are very pleased that our arguments have, yet again, prevailed in a unanimous verdict of the Court of Appeal and that winning customers, uniquely welcome at Betfair, now have this clarity. It is obviously sensible that William Hill have decided not to seek leave to appeal."
"It remains unfortunate that the seven figure costs incurred by the Levy Board in defending William Hill’s litigation have had a direct and significant impact on prize money. William Hill Online remains by far Britain’s largest non-levy paying bookmaker".
William hill's legal team response: -
http://www.olswang.com/articles/2013/05 ... -the-levy/
Mark Davis response: -
http://www.markxdavies.com/2013/05/03/a ... s-at-last/
http://www.olswang.com/articles/2013/05 ... -the-levy/
Mark Davis response: -
http://www.markxdavies.com/2013/05/03/a ... s-at-last/
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
I am surprised more is not made in the press of the fact that Prize Money has been hit by this action by a substantial amount of money as Mark has mentioned in his piece.
I also wonder about the ruling on the voler la vedette case and if someone ever did take them to court over the issue now it is 100% clear that Betfair are who we bet against and not other individuals.
I also wonder about the ruling on the voler la vedette case and if someone ever did take them to court over the issue now it is 100% clear that Betfair are who we bet against and not other individuals.
-
superfrank
- Posts: 2762
- Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 8:28 pm
William Hill to close 109 shops after duty rise
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27153475
the high st bookies haven't been doing too well recently
Share prices
William Hill http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business/mark ... _month.stm
Ladbrokes http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business/mark ... _month.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27153475
the high st bookies haven't been doing too well recently
Share prices
William Hill http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business/mark ... _month.stm
Ladbrokes http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business/mark ... _month.stm