Lee Gibson, a multimillionaire “problem gambler,” has lost his appeal in the Court of Appeal, after suing Betfair over losing close-to £1.5 million ($2 million) on gambling.
Gibson claimed that the betting platform had a duty to protect him from himself, as they were aware of the gambling-related harm he was suffering.
The gambler had placed more than 30,000 individual bets with Betfair between 2009 and 2019, and he has been trying to reclaim around £1,000,000.
During the period of time listed, Gibson owned a large property portfolio of tenanted properties which was reported to have been generating substantial rental income, with this highlighted in the latest court document.
Flutter Entertainment is the parent company of the sportsbook operator, with other brands like FanDuel and Paddy Power under its company too. It was in 2024 when Judge Nigel Bird, in the UK High Court, rejected the case, but this was then appealed by the punter.
Appeal in Betfair case is rejected
The appeal was rejected on Monday (December 8) with Gibson’s claim initially being on five grounds. The first ground aimed to challenge the conclusion that there was no breach of the license conditions, while ground 2(a) challenged the finding of no duty of care.
Ground 2(b) challenged the finding of no negligence, while ground 2(c) challenged causation. Finally, the fifth ground, challenged the conclusion about s33 of the Gambling Act that gambling contracts entered into in breach of the licensing conditions are not void.
On 8 December 2025, the Court of Appeal handed down judgment in Gibson v TSE Malta LP (t/a Betfair) [2025] EWCA Civ 1589, dismissing the appeal brought by a former Betfair Exchange customer. The October 2025 hearing attracted wide press coverage and was billed as a landmark case… pic.twitter.com/hCii9TgQUU
— 3 Verulam Buildings (@3VBchambers) December 9, 2025
The new Court of Appeal document goes through each ground, before a conclusion was given which reads: “Standing back, the judge considered the relevant evidence, made no errors of principle in doing so and came to an entirely reasonable conclusion on that evidence.
“I can see no justification for allowing the appeal against the conclusion that Betfair neither knew nor ought to have known that Mr Gibson was a problem gambler.”
Featured image: Flickr, licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0
The post Punter who sued Betfair after almost $2 million gambling loss loses appeal appeared first on ReadWrite.
