• Home
  • News
  • Marketing
  • Court orders Entain to grant Tabcorp access to documents on Australian advertising deal
igamingnext photo
An Australian court has instructed Entain and the Australian Hotels Association (AHA) to provide Tabcorp with documents related to a deal signed last year, enabling NSW pubs to advertise Entain’s Ladbrokes and Neds brands.

Tabcorp has an exclusive agreement to operate wagering terminals at NSW’s pubs and clubs under a state licence valid until 2033.

In November, the operator launched legal action to determine whether a marketing deal between Entain and the AHA undermined its exclusivity agreement and “raise a risk of contravening the Unlawful Gambling Act of 1998”.

Tabcorp claimed that it lacked sufficient information about the arrangement despite making reasonable enquiries, and requested further information from both companies to decide whether it would take broader legal action.

In a decision handed down today (15 March), the New South Wales Supreme Court ruled that Entain and the AHA must produce documents setting out details about the layout of planned Ladbrokes and Neds-branded lounges in NSW pubs.

Tabcorp: “Tabcorp will review the documents disclosed in order to assess whether or not to commence legal proceedings against Entain or AHA NSW, or both, in the Supreme Court.”

Moreover, the Court also determined that Entain and AHA NSW must hand over legal advice regarding the legality of the agreement between them and arrangements with NSW venues.

Tabcorp said it welcomed the court’s judgement.

“The Court accepted that whether the proposed arrangements will result in a breach of the Unlawful Gambling Act may well depend on the detail of those arrangements,” Tabcorp said.

“Tabcorp will review the documents disclosed in order to assess whether or not to commence legal proceedings against Entain or AHA NSW, or both, in the Supreme Court,” the company added.

Tabcorp had also requested access to other documents pertaining to commercial and financial assessments of the partnership, but the court rejected this request.

Similar posts