Defense Deadline Extended for Former BetCity Owners in Entain Lawsuit

Late last month, Entain, the leading gaming and entertainment giant, filed a lawsuit against the former owners of BetCity, a leading online betting and sports brand it acquired last year. The lawsuit came after a couple of undisclosed accidents that involved the brand and ultimately resulted in monetary penalties. Entain alleged that BetCity’s former owners failed to disclose details regarding the two violations, one which involved a breach of the advertising rules in the Netherlands and the second one which was related to an alleged anti-money laundering breach.

Due to the breaches, BetCity was fined €3 million ($3.2 million) and €400,000 ($433,000), penalties that its former owners agreed to pay. Yet, Entain acknowledged that the enforcement action against the brand had a far bigger impact than the imposed fines. The company also highlighted that the violations damaged the reputation of BetCity, adding that the negative impact “far exceeds” the cost of the monetary penalties imposed.

While the lawsuit was filed late last month, the deadline for submission of the defense was recently extended. As announced by Casino Nieuws, former owners of BetCity in the case were granted an extension of the period they can submit their defense along with counterclaims. This period, according to the publication, was extended through Tuesday, March 19, 2024.

The Legal Hurdle Continues

The agreed extension grants the former owners of the Dutch brand more time to prepare their defense. It follows an agreement between the two involved parties. While the period for submitting defense and counterclaim was extended, Entain refused to provide information requested by BetCity’s former owners. In particular, the ex-owners of the brand asked Entain to disclose what potential settlement it may require in the legal battle.

Previously, Entain said that it was after “significant damages,” but did not disclose a specific sum. Upon the most recent request by BetCity’s former owners, the company responded that they are not entitled to receive such information yet. According to the company, the difference in the value of the brand will be “determined on the basis of expert evidence.”

The former owners of the leading betting and online gaming brand had previously disputed Entain’s claim that the breaches exceeded the cost of the fines.