The High Court case between Sky Betting and Gaming (SBG) and a self-declared problem gambler who claims to have received marketing material without consent has taken a fresh twist.
Continuing its dispute against the claims, an appeal has been secured by the operator after a January 2025 High Court ruling by Justice Collins Rice determined that permissions had not been given for the collection of personal data due to being a problem gambler.
SBG is being represented by the law firm Wiggin.
A new test was created by the High Court for obtaining valid consent under UK GDPR and PECR. The test was said to consist of three strands, but the High Court determined that consent would be valid if one of two conditions applied and could be evidenced: the subject subjectively intended to give their consent, or their choice about consent was autonomous.
Based on the operator’s cookie placement and data collection, direct marketing communications were sent to RTM, who then gambled and lost funds on the SBG’s platform between 2007-2019, disclosing losses of £45,000 last year.
The decision was appealed by SBG on five different counts, noting that the High Court’s:
- Ruling on a matter that wasn’t raised by the claimant, specifically that the claimant had not argued that their consent was invalid due to their gambling disorder, and therefore there hadn’t been an opportunity for SBG to present a defence to this.
- Approach in law on what amounts to legally valid consent was wrong, with UK GDPR setting out the proper test of it being specific, informed, unambiguous and freely given.
- Conclusion that SBG had not obtained consent was incorrect.
A Flutter UK&I spokesperson told SBC News: “We are pleased to see the Court of Appeal has ruled in our favour. This is a very important decision not only for Sky Bet but the wider industry.
“We take pride in our leading position on customer safety and remain absolutely committed to player protection.”
The Information Commissioner’s Office intervened and assisted the court on the matter of data collection consent during the process.
With the Court of Appeal finding in favour of SBG, the case will now be remitted to the High Court to be heard again.
Wiggin noted that the Court of Appeal has rejected the suggestion that the ‘test for consent contains any subjective element’ and that it is entirely objective and set against the UK GDPR’s criteria.
The law firm added that the court concluded that what a controller ‘knows or ought reasonably to know about a data subject is not relevant when considering whether consent was freely given’, so the test for valid consent is ‘an objective one without any qualification’.
Wiggin stated: “The judgment provides certainty for controllers when obtaining consent. Controllers should assess the information they provide to data subjects about processing on the basis of consent and their mechanisms when obtaining consent.
“If these, objectively, result in data subjects’ consent being specific, informed, unambiguous and freely given, then controllers can have greater confidence that their processing complies with the UK GDPR and PECR.”
Want to hear more stories like this? Check out the new SBC Media YouTube Channel, the new home of all things multimedia at SBC, where our team deep-dives into the biggest stories from across the sports betting, iGaming, affiliate and payments industries.
