Coral Wins Gambling Case
A judge this week sided with British bookmaker Coral in a long-running gambling dispute.
Albert Kinloch, 72, placed £100 at 2,500/1 to win £250,000 on the Rangers football club being relegated
The Rangers were removed from the SPL in 2012 following liquidation and returned to football in the SFL Third Division.
In his decision, the judge stated that the Rangers were not technically relegated.
Kinloch’s betting slip read: "From SPL - Rangers to be relegated" and he maintained that relegation meant an SPL side starting the next season in a lower league.
Basing their decision on league rules, Coral defined relegation as going down only one league on points.
Judge Lord Bannatyne said: "The foregoing process cannot be described as being moved by anyone to a lower division, or being moved down or demoted.”
He added: "I am satisfied that what did not happen was that the SPL moved or demoted Rangers to a lower division."
"Rangers ended up in a lower division by the entry into a contract which allowed them to join the SFL in the third division," said the judge.
"I am persuaded that the reasonable man is not only directed but driven to the rules of a particular sport when placing a bet in a sporting context. The natural and ordinary meaning of a sporting term is the definition of that term within the rules of that sport," he said.
"It would be impossible for a betting business to be run and for it to offer bets on sporting events without reference to the rules of the sports.
"I am satisfied that the odds of 2500/1 to a reasonable person placing a bet as well as the reasonable bookmaker would clearly indicate that relegation meant what is contended for by the defenders (Coral) that is, the highly unlikely event."
- Alistair Prescott, Gambling911.com
