Government wins casinos ruling

A judge rejected accusations by the British Casino Association (BCA) that Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell had unfairly and unlawfully failed to provide "a level playing field" for existing casinos to compete with the new multi-million pound operations.

Lawyers for the BCA, which represents the interests of more than 90% of current gaming businesses, said they faced being treated as "second-class citizens" and losing up to £120 million a year in profits.

But Mr Justice Langstaff ruled at London's High Court that the legal challenge failed on all counts.

Michael Beloff QC, appearing for the BCA and four of its member companies, had accused Ms Jowell of "closing her mind" to the possibility of making greater provision for existing premises, including access to lucrative gaming machines.

Mr Beloff said there had also been inadequate consultation and Ms Jowell had been "materially mistaken on a number of material facts". He argued that the Transitional Order, made under the 2005 Gambling Act to pave the way for the controversial new wave of casinos, was fatally flawed.

Rejecting the challenge in a written judgment, the judge said: "My conclusion is that each point, whether taken separately or together, fails. No basis has been made out before me for challenging the propriety of Paragraph 65 of Schedule 4 to the Transitional Provisions Order of 2006. It was properly made, whatever the merits of arguments about its consequences. The claim must fail."

The BCA has urged the Government to "look again" at its policy in order to secure fair competition between old and new casinos.

The legal challenge was backed by four companies - Gala Casinos Ltd, Grosvenor Casinos Ltd, London Clubs International Ltd and Stanley Casinos Ltd - which between them operate 116 of the 138 existing casinos in Britain.

The House of Lords voted against plans to open the first 5,000sq m (54,000sq ft) super-casino in Manchester, but the Government says it will press on with its controversial policy.