The British Casino Association (BCA) lost its High Court challenge today over the Government’s plans for 17 new casinos, including the first Las Vegas-style "super-casino".
Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell was accused in court of treating existing gaming establishments with "blatant unfairness" which could cost them #120 million a year in lost profits.
But Mr Justice Langstaff ruled at London’s High Court that the legal challenge failed on all counts.
The BCA, which represents the interests of more than 90% of current gaming businesses, had challenged the legality of Paragraph 65 of Schedule 4 of the Transitional Order made under the 2005 Gambling Act, which helped pave the way for the controversial new wave of casinos.
But the judge ruled the order was "properly made".
Michael Beloff QC, appearing for BCA and four of its member companies, had argued at a recent hearing at the High Court that the Government’s gaming policy had failed to provide "a level playing field" and could ruin existing casinos.
He accused Ms Jowell of "closing her mind" to the possibility of the new legislation making provision for existing casinos to have greater gambling entitlements, including access to lucrative gaming machines.
Mr Beloff said there had also been inadequate consultation and Ms Jowell had been "materially mistaken on a number of material facts."
Rejecting the challenge in a written judgment handed down this morning, the judge said: "My conclusion is that each point, whether taken separately or together, fails.
"No basis has been made out before me for challenging the propriety of Paragraph 65 of Schedule 4 to the Transitional Provisions Order of 2006.
"It was properly made, whatever the merits of arguments about its consequences. The claim must fail."
