Tim is a journalist, author, and columnist with two decades of experience writing for outlets like the BBC, the Guardian, and Chosun Ilbo. He is an expert on regulation, business, and industry and is fluent...
Read Full BioAn Australian court has rejected a request by the iGaming operator Aristocrat Leisure to question plaintiffs in a class action suit about their possible gambling disorders.
Lawyerly reported that the presiding judge in a Melbourne branch of the Federal Court of Australia turned down the request.
The judge explained that allowing Aristocrat to ask class action members to answer its questions would lead to “self-diagnosis.” This would inevitably fail to produce reliable results, the court added.
Aristocrat Gambling Disorders Questions Rejected
The plaintiffs responded to the request last month, arguing that Aristocrat’s request was unfair.
Lawyers for the group said that vulnerable individuals should not be asked to diagnose their own gambling habits.
The judge agreed that obliging the plaintiffs to speak about potential gambling disorders or mental conditions before mediation efforts might put unfair pressure on the group.
The court added that this could also undermine the legal process.
Aristocrat’s legal team said that the data would help assess liability and the scale of potential damages.
The class action suit’s legal team has accused Sydney-based Aristocrat of operating virtual games that imitate online casino games.
They claim that the games in question enable users to spend real money through in-app purchases.
The suit also names the Aristocrat subsidiaries Product Madness and Big Fish Games.
Under the terms of the Interactive Gambling Act 2001, all forms of online casino gaming are illegal in Australia.
The suit names all Australians who made in-app purchases with real money from December 22, 2017, to December 12, 2024.
The games include titles such as Heart of Vegas, Big Fish Casino, and Epic Diamond Slots. Experts predict that the parties will likely attempt to resolve their dispute through a neutral third party later this year.
However, if attempts to mediate the case prove unsuccessful, it will likely head to trial.
2020 US Case May Inspire Lawyers
The plaintiffs and their legal team will have been inspired by a 2020 class action victory against Big Fish in Washington.
The lawyers claimed certain Artisocrat social apps were classified as illegal gambling software under state law.
The case culminated in Artisocrat paying a settlement worth $155 million.
The court ruled that casino-type games can still be classified as gambling, even if apps do not allow players to convert virtual in-game currencies into cash.
The ruling comes as a further blow for Aristocrat, which suffered a legal setback in a long-running copyright battle last month.
However, the Australian firm also scored a coup this month when it ousted its bitter rival Light & Wonder as the operator of land-based Monopoly-themed slots.
