The High Court delivers.  Crown has been successful for the third and final time in defending a claim by high roller Harry Kakavas to recover his gambling losses (Kakavas v Crown Melbourne Limited [2013] HCA 25).  In its joint judgement, the Full Court of judges used some strong words about the heat of the economic battle at the tables:

“Gambling transactions are a rare, if not unique, species of economic activity in a civilised community, in that each party sets out openly to inflict harm on the counterparty.”

And reminds us that gambling is a legal activity and not of itself predatory:

“To describe the business of a casino as the victimisation of the gamblers who choose to frequent it might well make sense in moral or social terms depending on one’s moral or social philosophy; but it does not make a lot of sense so far as the law is concerned, given that the conduct of the business is lawful.”

Sensible words.  Only if a gaming operator acts like a predator, deliberately and unfairly exploiting the weakness of a player, will it be acting unlawfully.