Next story

High Court dismisses Betfair negligence claim brought by Luke Ashton’s family

The judge found insufficient evidence of gambling addiction, differing from a coroner’s 2023 conclusion that addiction contributed to Ashton’s death.

Court papers and a wooden gavel beside a phone displaying a generic betting interface.
Illustration: Gembly (AI-generated)

A High Court judge dismissed a negligence claim against Betfair on November 13, rejecting a case brought by the family of Luke Ashton, a Leicester man who died by suicide in 2021.

Judge Jonathan Swift found that the duty of care asserted by the family did not exist in the circumstances of the case, Focus Gaming News reported. He also concluded that the legal test of foreseeability had not been met.

Ashton’s family began the proceedings in 2024. They alleged that promotions and product features they described as addictive had encouraged his gambling. Ashton was 40 when he died.

Betfair, which is owned by Flutter Entertainment, defended the claim by arguing that gambling operators do not have a general legal duty to protect customers experiencing addiction.

Swift found there was insufficient evidence to establish that Ashton had a gambling addiction. That finding differed from the conclusion reached at an inquest in June 2023.

Coroner Ivan Cartwright found that Ashton had experienced gambling addiction since at least 2019 and that it contributed to his death. The coroner also criticized Betfair’s conduct and identified occasions when opportunities to prevent harm may have been missed.

An inquest does not decide civil liability, the issue before the High Court in the negligence case.

Ashton’s widow, Annie Ashton, has brought a separate High Court challenge against the Gambling Commission. She is contesting the regulator’s decision not to take action against Betfair following her husband’s death.

Companies in this storyFLUTNYSE
  • Betfair
  • High Court
  • Gambling harm
  • Gambling Commission
  • Luke Ashton
Next storyDoubleDown received $17-per-share takeover proposal from unidentified US buyer