About this app
What is Ignite The Night?
It found Lalabet’s operators and directors had acted unlawfully by targeting Dutch players and ordered them to cease activities and provide detailed ownership and shareholder information.
The court also explored potential liabilities for trust administrators and local representatives who facilitate illegal gambling sites.
While it did not find Curaçao-based trust firm DECC and its directors liable in this case, the ruling signalled that closer scrutiny of such intermediaries could unfold.
What is Ignite The Night?
ACMA’s investigation revealed multiple compliance breaches, primarily concerning account management and marketing controls.
The regulator noted that several inactive accounts remained open long after users requested exclusion.
Specifically, 156 out of 229 accounts with no pending bets remained linked to BetStop users seven days after self-exclusion registration. Some accounts were non-compliant for periods extending up to 200 days.
About Ignite The Night
Judge Kennedy explained in her ruling, “The court finds that Hasselback’s statements that continued representation in this matter would cause him to violate several ethical obligations trigger mandatory withdrawal under Model Rule 1.16(a) and is sufficient for granting his motion.” She added, “Hasselback need not be required to provide details, beyond his written motion, to establish that mandatory withdrawal is warranted,” and stated that requiring him “to specify the basis for his mandatory withdrawal could create the untenable situation of an attorney having to choose between his obligation of candor to the court and his obligation to maintain his client’s confidences.”
Unfortunately, because of that attorney-client privilege, it is difficult to know what types of ethical dilemmas Hasselback is facing. However, it’s likely just the mere hint at issues will be enough for IPI to find itself, once again, being more closely scrutinized. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, given gaming regulators’ reluctance to hold the company accountable for its actions.
IPI now has until this Friday to find a new lawyer to carry the six-case workload Hasselback had, but will most likely use this as an excuse to delay the ongoing legal battles. It won’t get very far with that, though, and perhaps Judge Kennedy expected IPI to try something. She added in her ruling that the attorney’s exit “may cause some delay, [but] that delay is not so much so that it would cause significant prejudice or adversely and materially affect the plaintiff.”
