An imminent decision on a case brought by a compulsive multimillion-dollar gambler against a casino he claims lured him back to the table could have implications for the Australian betting industry.
Harry Kakavas, a Queensland Gold Coast property dealer from Melbourne, is suing the city's Crown casino for A$30 million ($37 million) in losses and damages.
The Victorian Supreme Court heard that he turned over A$1.5 billion during a 15-month spree at Crown's baccarat tables, betting up to A$300,000 a hand.
Crown - which is owned by James Packer - disputes he was an addict, and denies using incentives to entice him back after a 10-year absence.
Those incentives, according to Kakavas, included flying him to and from the Gold Coast in the casino's private jet, and giving him start-up funds - or "lucky money" - in gift-wrapped boxes containing up to $50,000.
In the 1990s Kakavas had voluntarily excluded himself from the casino and sought treatment for a gambling problem. He continued to gamble elsewhere, although at various times he excluded himself or was banned from almost every Australian casino.
In 2004, the court heard, Packer's late father, Kerry, spotted him in Las Vegas, where Kakavas had just "dropped" up to A$4 million. Packer snr, a legendary gambler himself, phoned Crown's chief operating officer, John Williams, to ask who Kakavas was and "why he's not playing at Crown".
A decision was then made to re-admit the high-roller, although the company allegedly knew - according to Kakavas's lawyer, Allan Myers, QC - that "when he got going at Crown, he could not stop". Kakavas later lost A$2.3 million during one 28-minute baccarat session.
Williams described that as not unusual for a successful businessman engaging in recreational gambling.
On another occasion, Kakavas gambled non-stop for 17 hours, caught a few hours' sleep, then hit the tables again. "I don't know what [Guinness World Records] say, but it would be pretty close [to a world record]," he told Justice David Harper.
Myers claimed the casino gave his client millions of dollars in credit and set up a secret bank account to disguise his payments to Crown.
Crown, which is counter-suing Kakavas for A$1 million, argued that he made his own choices and could not blame the casino for his poor decisions.
The outcome of the case could have serious implications focusing on a casino's duty of care to its customers.
Charles Waterstreet, a barrister and columnist with Sydney's Sun Herald, told the newspaper: "Whether Kakavas wins or loses, gambling outlets will have to be much more vigilant about keeping compulsive gamblers out of their establishments."
Gambling case set to shake up industry
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.