This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk/6739725.stm

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Court ruling on casinos challenge Casinos challenge fails in court
(about 8 hours later)
A High Court judgement is due later on a challenge to government plans for 17 regional casinos across Britain. Small casino operators have failed in their High Court challenge against plans for 17 new regional casinos.
The plans include opening the first super-casino, in Manchester. British Casino Association lawyers said the plans, rejected by the House of Lords, would unfairly condemn existing premises to "second-class status".
British Casino Association lawyers have argued the plans, which were rejected by peers, would condemn existing premises to "second-class status". The government said the challenge was without merit and Mr Justice Langstaff ruled against it on all counts.
The government says the challenge is without merit, but faces having to rethink its reforms of gambling laws if the judgement goes against it. The UK's first super-casino is to open in Manchester, with deregulation under the Gambling Act from September.
The Gambling Act on deregulation of the industry is due to come into effect in September. May's High Court hearing was aimed at establishing whether the act discriminates against existing operators, who are allowed far fewer gambling machines than the 17 new venues will have.
Peers rejected the casino plans in March, but the government has said it intends to continue pressing forward with its policy. Lady Penny Cobham, chair of the British Casino Association (BCA), said the judge had acknowledged the concerns of existing casinos.
May's High Court hearing was aimed at establishing whether the Gambling Act discriminates against existing operators, who are allowed far fewer gambling machines than the 17 new venues would have. "We hope that the judge's comments will encourage the department and the government to consult more effectively and to reconsider the position of legitimate and successful British casinos going into the future," she told BBC News 24.
The British Casino Association (BCA) argued that the new premises would have an unfair advantage. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport said it welcomed the ruling that its policy "was fairly and properly made".
'Lost profits' "Our approach has always been a cautious one," a spokesman said.
A High Court judgement against the plans would have forced a rethink.
Peers voted against the plan for a Manchester super-casino in March, but the government has said it intends to continue pressing forward with its policy.
'Disproportionate' advantage
The BCA had argued in court that the new premises would have an unfair advantage over existing casinos.
Michael Beloff, for the BCA, told the court lost profits could be as much as £120m a year.Michael Beloff, for the BCA, told the court lost profits could be as much as £120m a year.
And he said Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell had not lived up to her "duties of fair consultation" concerning the new developments.And he said Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell had not lived up to her "duties of fair consultation" concerning the new developments.
But Ms Jowell's lawyers said the case should be dismissed. It will pose a serious threat to long-established British businesses and jobs Lady Penny CobhamBritish Casino Association Existing casinos will be allowed no more than 20 limited stake and prize gaming machines from 1 September.
The BCA represents the interests of existing casinos, and its legal action was backed by member companies operating 116 of the UK's 138 casinos. The new small, large and regional casinos will be allowed between 80 and 1,250 machines.
"It is important to note that the court was concerned purely with process. It was not making a judgement on the merits of the government's policy of discrimination," said Lady Cobham.
"Our view is that the very substantial competitive advantage granted to the 17 new casinos is disproportionate and will pose a serious threat to long-established British businesses and jobs."
The locations chosen to have a "large" regional casino are Leeds, Hull, Great Yarmouth, Middlesbrough, Milton Keynes, Southampton, Solihull and Newham, in London.The locations chosen to have a "large" regional casino are Leeds, Hull, Great Yarmouth, Middlesbrough, Milton Keynes, Southampton, Solihull and Newham, in London.
Smaller casinos would be in Bath and North East Somerset, Dumfries and Galloway, East Lindsey, Luton, Scarborough, Swansea, Torbay and Wolverhampton.Smaller casinos would be in Bath and North East Somerset, Dumfries and Galloway, East Lindsey, Luton, Scarborough, Swansea, Torbay and Wolverhampton.
Their sizes determine the number of machines and the size of the jackpots they would be allowed to offer.Their sizes determine the number of machines and the size of the jackpots they would be allowed to offer.
The BCA represents the interests of existing casinos, and its legal action was backed by member companies operating 116 of the UK's 138 casinos.