|
|
 |
| |
 |
|
|
 Welcome to
the News desk.
|
 |
|
|
| Phil Ivey arrives at UK Supreme Court in £7.7m
baccarat case |
13/07/17 |
|
 Editor |
• The UK Supreme
Court Judges have agreed to hear Phil Ivey’s infamous high-stakes baccarat
case against London-based Crockfords Casino.
To briefly remind you, Phil Ivey is suing Crockfords Casino
to the tune of £7.8 million he won back in 2012 playing
punto banco (a version of
baccarat). Crockfords refused to pay the high roller after they had concluded
Ivey and his partner were using a technique known as “edge
sorting.”
Edge sorting is a skill of recognizing small defects
on the backs of the cards, allowing the player to distinguish favorable from
unfavorable cards in the game of baccarat. Although it doesn’t guarantee
the win, successful application of edge sorting turns the edge in player’s
favour.
The chips are down and U.S. poker star Phil Ivey is going
all in by taking his long-running dispute against a London casino all the way
to the U.K. Supreme Court.
Ivey is attempting to recover £7.8
(about $9.6 million) in winnings that have been withheld by Crockfords, an
exclusive casino in London's wealthy Mayfair district, after he was caught
cheating.
Ivey, described by the World Series of Poker as "arguably the
best poker player in the world," admitted to using a controversial cards
technique to amass the vast sum while playing punto banco at the casino in
2012. But he said that so-called "edge-sorting," which involves identifying
variations in the pattern printed on the backs of cards in order to gain an
advantage over the house, was a legitimate practice for skillful players and
that the casino should have protected itself against it.
|
His argument was
dismissed by the U.K. High Court in 2014 and then again by the Court of Appeal
last November, however, with the judge ruling that the practice amounted to
cheating and that Ivey had "achieved his winnings through manipulating
Crockfords' facilities for the game without Crockfords' knowledge."
Ivey is now making one last throw of the dice after the Supreme Court,
the U.K.'s highest court for civil cases, granted him permission to challenge
the appeals court decision. A spokesman for Ivey told The American Lawyer that
an appeal has been lodged with the court and that the case is likely to be
heard next year.
Ivey said in a statement that continuing the legal
battle was "the right thing to do … for the entire gaming industry," and
that the Court of Appeal ruling "made no sense." He added: "The original trial
judge ruled that I was not dishonest and none of the three Appeal Court judges
disagreed, and yet the decision went against me by a majority of two to one."
Matthew Dowd, a partner at specialist London media law firm Archerfield
Partners, which is advising Ivey, said that the Court of Appeal ruling left the
interpretation of cheating under the Section 42 of the Gambling Act "totally
unclear." The Supreme Court's decision to grant permission to appeal
"demonstrates that [the court] agrees with that view," he said.
Ivey is
also being represented by Richard Spearman of 39 Essex Chambers and Max Mallin
of Wilberforce Chambers.
Crockfords owner Genting UK is being
represented in the dispute by London-based law firm Kingsley Napley and
Christopher Pymont of Maitland Chambers. |
| |
Genting UK president
Paul Willcock said at the time of the Court of Appeal ruling that it
"vindicated" the company's actions in refusing to give Ivey the money. Genting
could not immediately be reached for comment in relation to the Supreme Court
action.
Ivey has won 10 World Series of Poker bracelets, one World
Poker Tour title and appeared at nine World Poker Tour final tables. He has
career casino earnings of more than $23 million, according to poker magazine
CardPlayer. |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Main Menu
