Skip to main content
Law

Return to Question

Clarified aides position as per guardian article
Source Link
User65535
User65535
  • 7.7k
  • 5
  • 28
  • 60

It is in the news that one of the UK Prime Ministers closest parliamentary aide placed a £100 bet on a July election just three days before the prime minister named the date. There is a question about the legality of this:

A spokesperson for the Gambling Commission said: “If someone uses confidential information in order to gain an unfair advantage when betting, this may constitute an offence of cheating under section 42 of the Gambling Act, which is a criminal offence.

Section 42 of the Gambling Act starts:

Cheating

(1)A person commits an offence if he—

(a)cheats at gambling

There is also this Explanatory Note:

Section 42: Cheating

163.This section creates a criminal offence for cheating at gambling, and repeals the old offence of cheating in section 17 of the Gaming Act 1845 (c.109). The word “cheating” is not defined but has its normal, everyday meaning.

It seems to me that most gambling has been in relation to sporting events, and gambling on the outcome of a sporting event one has influence over is fairly common. For example in horse racing if a horse is on particularly good form many in the stable as well as the owner are likely to bet on it.

How is section 42 of the Gambling Act interpreted in the situation that one has non-public information that affects the probability of an event? Are the rules different for sporting and/or political events? Are the rules different for politicians compared to professional athletes?

It is in the news that one of the UK Prime Ministers closest parliamentary aide placed a £100 bet on a July election just three days before the prime minister named the date. There is a question about the legality of this:

A spokesperson for the Gambling Commission said: “If someone uses confidential information in order to gain an unfair advantage when betting, this may constitute an offence of cheating under section 42 of the Gambling Act, which is a criminal offence.

Section 42 of the Gambling Act starts:

Cheating

(1)A person commits an offence if he—

(a)cheats at gambling

There is also this Explanatory Note:

Section 42: Cheating

163.This section creates a criminal offence for cheating at gambling, and repeals the old offence of cheating in section 17 of the Gaming Act 1845 (c.109). The word “cheating” is not defined but has its normal, everyday meaning.

It seems to me that most gambling has been in relation to sporting events, and gambling on the outcome of a sporting event one has influence over is fairly common. For example in horse racing if a horse is on particularly good form many in the stable as well as the owner are likely to bet on it.

How is section 42 of the Gambling Act interpreted in the situation that one has non-public information that affects the probability of an event? Are the rules different for sporting and/or political events? Are the rules different for politicians compared to professional athletes?

It is in the news that the UK Prime Ministers closest parliamentary aide placed a £100 bet on a July election just three days before the prime minister named the date. There is a question about the legality of this:

A spokesperson for the Gambling Commission said: “If someone uses confidential information in order to gain an unfair advantage when betting, this may constitute an offence of cheating under section 42 of the Gambling Act, which is a criminal offence.

Section 42 of the Gambling Act starts:

Cheating

(1)A person commits an offence if he—

(a)cheats at gambling

There is also this Explanatory Note:

Section 42: Cheating

163.This section creates a criminal offence for cheating at gambling, and repeals the old offence of cheating in section 17 of the Gaming Act 1845 (c.109). The word “cheating” is not defined but has its normal, everyday meaning.

It seems to me that most gambling has been in relation to sporting events, and gambling on the outcome of a sporting event one has influence over is fairly common. For example in horse racing if a horse is on particularly good form many in the stable as well as the owner are likely to bet on it.

How is section 42 of the Gambling Act interpreted in the situation that one has non-public information that affects the probability of an event? Are the rules different for sporting and/or political events? Are the rules different for politicians compared to professional athletes?

Source Link
User65535
User65535
  • 7.7k
  • 5
  • 28
  • 60

How does gambling on something when you have non-public information become cheating?

It is in the news that one of the UK Prime Ministers closest parliamentary aide placed a £100 bet on a July election just three days before the prime minister named the date. There is a question about the legality of this:

A spokesperson for the Gambling Commission said: “If someone uses confidential information in order to gain an unfair advantage when betting, this may constitute an offence of cheating under section 42 of the Gambling Act, which is a criminal offence.

Section 42 of the Gambling Act starts:

Cheating

(1)A person commits an offence if he—

(a)cheats at gambling

There is also this Explanatory Note:

Section 42: Cheating

163.This section creates a criminal offence for cheating at gambling, and repeals the old offence of cheating in section 17 of the Gaming Act 1845 (c.109). The word “cheating” is not defined but has its normal, everyday meaning.

It seems to me that most gambling has been in relation to sporting events, and gambling on the outcome of a sporting event one has influence over is fairly common. For example in horse racing if a horse is on particularly good form many in the stable as well as the owner are likely to bet on it.

How is section 42 of the Gambling Act interpreted in the situation that one has non-public information that affects the probability of an event? Are the rules different for sporting and/or political events? Are the rules different for politicians compared to professional athletes?