Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crockfords [2017] UKSC 67 is a landmark case in English contract law and gambling law that addressed the concept of dishonesty in the context of cheating at gambling.
The case involved a professional gambler, Mr Ivey, who had used a technique called "edge-sorting" to gain an advantage over the casino during a game of Punto Banco. The casino refused to pay out his winnings of £7.7 million, arguing that Mr. Ivey had cheated.
The Supreme Court in this case considered the test for dishonesty in criminal law, specifically the Ghosh test established in R v Ghosh [1982]. The court held that the second limb of the Ghosh test, which asks whether the defendant realised that what he was doing was dishonest according to the standards of ordinary and reasonable people, should be replaced by a new test based on the objective standards of ordinary and honest people.
The Court stated that dishonesty is a matter of the defendant's state of mind, but that the question of whether the defendant was dishonest must be determined by reference to the objective standards of ordinary and honest people. The court emphasised that a defendant's belief that his conduct was honest, even if it is honestly held, will not be a defence if that belief is not objectively reasonable.
Applying this new test, the Supreme Court held that Mr Ivey's conduct amounted to cheating, and that he had acted dishonestly. The court concluded that the casino was entitled to withhold Mr Ivey's winnings, and that Mr Ivey was not entitled to recover them.
This case clarified and updated the test for dishonesty in criminal law, and its principles have been applied in subsequent cases involving allegations of dishonesty.
You can learn more about this topic and other relevant case law with our Criminal Law notes.
