On 27/03/2015 10:34, Peter Parry wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 23:45:59 +0000, JNugent
wrote:

On 26/03/2015 22:43, Peter Parry wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 20:37:47 +0000, JNugent

"335 Enforceability of gambling contracts
(1)The fact that a contract relates to gambling shall not prevent its
enforcement. "

This is hardly relevant to the topic which was under discussion, but is
a gambling debt always a contract within the meaning of the Gambling Act
2005?

As long as it occurred after 7 Sept 2007 (when the act came into
force) and was established in a legal gambling establishment or
activity.

I ask because the extensive list of definitions given in Section 353
does not provide a term of art definition of "gambling debt, "debt" or
"contract".

Presumably, these terms fall therefore to be construed as having their
ordinary everyday meaning. Is there something in the Act (elsewhere than
in Section 353) which provides for a particular definition?

No, these are terms which are not specific to this act and therefore
have their normal meaning. "Gambling Debt" or "debt"would be a debt
owed under a gambling contract.

It would have to be under a contract for S.335 to be of application.

Most UK gambling is done on a straightforward "pay in advance, with or
without the tax" basis, so debt would not arise. It seems it would only
arise in the case of private wagers or credit allowed at a casino.

Proving that a private wager had been entered into - or defaulted on -
might be the difficulty at the enforcement stage.

Just a thought. Perhaps that provision isn't as useful as might be supposed.