운영자 뉴스

UK – Park Lane Club wins out in High Court ruling over VIP cash-back claim

Croatian businessman Juste Puharic has lost in his High Court battle against The Park Lane Club in Mayfair after his claims that the casino failed to pay-up the commission on the bets he made despite paying his £1.5m winnings.

He claimed he staked the amount because casino staff encouraged him with a cash-back offer on his bets. He believes he is ‘contractually entitled’ to £243,518, representing a 0.9 per cent commission on his bets of £27,057,621, in addition to the £1,466,056. He spent £27m over five days in May 2015.

His claim was dismissed by Judge Mansfield, who ruled that Mr Puharic had not reached a ‘concluded agreement’ surrounding incentives and bonuses with the casino’s owners Silverbond Enterprises.

Judge Mansfield ruled: “In my judgment, there was no concluded agreement reached between the parties about bonuses or incentives. The claimant was paid his winnings and is entitled to no further sum.”

Puharic 씨를 대표하는 Christopher Bamford는 카지노 직원이 거리에서 그에게 접근한 후 그에게 커피와 저녁 식사를 제안했으며 다른 Mayfair 카지노 중 최고의 카지노 제안과 일치하거나 이길 것이라고 말했습니다.

푸하릭 씨는 카지노가 자신의 베팅에 대해 0.9%의 수수료를 지불하기로 동의했다고 주장하며, 이는 그가 이기든 지든 다른 메이페어 카지노에서 받을 수 있는 캐시백 제안과 일치합니다.

Park Lane 카지노를 대표하는 Guy Olliff-Cooper는 다음과 같이 말했습니다. “클럽이 경쟁력을 갖추기 위해 최선을 다할 것이므로 Puharic이 다른 곳에서 받은 매칭 조건을 고려할 것이라고 말할 수 있습니다. 하지만 공식적인 제안은 없었다”고 말했다.

“Casinos use a variety of incentives to attract customers. The defendant’s position is simply that it never made him this matching offer. The defendant did not offer to match or better the incentives that Mr Puharic received at other Mayfair casinos. The only incentive offered to roulette players at the Park Lane Club was discretionary free hospitality and commission which could be used as a ‘discount on losses’ but not claimed by a player who came out on top. The defendant did not offer to match or better the incentives that Mr Puharic received at other Mayfair casinos.”

The casino recently had its licence revoked over concerns over its ownership, although the premises can continue to trade during the appeal process. It was also fined £1.8m in 2019 as a result of money laundering failings