On another try to make the British Columbia Lottery Corporation (BCLC) and two online gambling casinos responsible for losses sustained from gambling, while enrolled in a casino exclusion program, problem gambler Joy Ross once again failed.
The Canadian Supreme Court ruled in favor of the BCLC by stating that the matter of participating in a self-exclusion program is not a legal contract. It does not bind the lottery agency or the casinos, into assuming responsibility if casino employees fail to spot participants who act contrary to the purpose and objectives of such programs.
Ross first filed the lawsuit in 2010 after losing as much as $330,000 in a B.C. casino by successfully eluding the detection measures that would prevent problem gamblers from entering gambling parlours. The measures included a facial recognition system that was supposed to identify those who are in the lottery agency’s “Do Not Admit List”. Although Ross’ lawyer contends that the gambling establishment as well as the state government “owed addicted gamblers a duty of care” once a problem gambler has been added to the exclusion list, the Supreme Court upheld previous court rulings that led to the dismissal of Ross’ case.
The presiding SC judge maintained that if Ross is granted entitlement to receive payment for whatever gambling losses incurred after joining the program, such a precedent would encourage all problem gamblers to enlist in the exclusion program not as a means of curing their problem gambling behavior, but for purposes of demanding refunds of their gambling losses.