The Tiger

About The Tiger

Spillemyndigheden said it contributed actively to this work and sat on FATF’s gaming sector working group. The regulator confirmed that many of the indicators in the report carry relevance for operators licensed in Denmark.

FATF’s warning on illegal and offshore gambling will resonate in Denmark. Last year, Spillemyndigheden secured a court order to block 178 unlicensed gambling sites, the largest such action in the regulator’s history. 

The case highlighted how illegal operators disguise their presence through multiple site variations, a tactic the FATF report also flags as a red flag indicator. 

What is The Tiger?

The investigation, which included secretly recorded interviews and conversations with Evolution staff members and other whistleblowers, was followed up with a damning report accusing the supplier of knowingly providing its services in sanctioned jurisdictions.

In April, court documents showed that Evolution had sought to add Playtech to the case.

While Playtech has backed its Black Cube investigation Evolution slammed it as a “smear campaign”, and has strongly refuted the claims made, citing them as “highly inflammatory and knowingly false”.

About The Tiger

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.”