The Tribune

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

The attorney for Chances Games has urged rival web shops, such as FML and Island Luck, to “put some skin in the game” given that they are totally exposed to the Grand Bahama Port Authority’s (GBPA) threat to cancel their licenses to operate in Freeport.

Carlson Shurland told Tribune Business it was “disconcerting” that other web shop operators were not joining his client to defend their Freeport business interests, given that the outcome of its battle with the GBPA would potentially have negative consequences for them.

While confident that Chances and its operating parent, Jarol Investments, would successfully obtain a Supreme Court injunction to prevent the GBPA cancelling its license in the interim, Mr Shurland warned that this would offer no protection to other web shops.

The GBPA is arguing that Freeport-based web shops are operating “in breach” of their license agreements with it, as these only allow them to conduct business as ‘Internet cafes’ - not gaming locations (see other story on Page 1B).

It is now threatening to cancel the licenses of all Freeport-based web shops, unless they agree to amend them accordingly and pay fees in line with those levied on casinos operating in the Port area.

“It is interesting and disconcerting that gaming houses such as Island Luck and FML, and others which have a major presence in Freeport, do not appreciate the domino effect this would have on their business licences,” Mr Shurland told Tribune Business via e-mail of the GBPA’s license cancellation threat.

“It would be naive of them to believe that they would be immune or treated differently from Jarol should the GBPA stick its tentacles into withdrawing their business licences.”

He added: “What these and other gaming houses fail to realise is that when Jarol is granted its injunction against the GBPA to maintain the ‘status quo’, the protection of that injunction would not extend to them, as they do not have any concurrent matter before the court relative to the issues of who is the appropriate regulator and licensor for gaming in Freeport.

“Essentially, these gaming houses must ‘put some skin in the game’ by becoming proactive and vocal in showing their support, for either the GBPA’s position or the Gaming Board’s position.

“Should they agree with the GBPA’s position then the certificate/gaming license issued by the Gaming Board on Wednesday, November 30, 2016, which they so proudly displayed for all to see, would not be worth the paper it is printed on in the Grand Bahama Port Authority’s jurisdiction.”

The fees being sought by the GBPA, equivalent to $300,000 per year or 1 per cent of per annum winnings, whichever is greater, represent a 500 per cent increase for the web shops.

The GBPA issued its license cancellation ultimatum after the Government intervened in the case brought against it by Jarol/Chances - to determine who is the gaming regulator for Freeport - at the ‘11th hour’.

The resulting delay in having the Supreme Court determine whether the Gaming Board or itself has the power to regulate web shop gaming in Freeport, the GBPA said, has “prejudiced” its ability to “bring order” to the sector’s licenses and fee structure.

Mr Shurland, meanwhile, branded the GBPA’s decision to withdraw its previous undertaking not to cancel Jarol’s license until the court matter is determined “an act of desperation”.

Suggesting that Freeport’s quasi-governmental authority appeared to be taking their dispute “personally”, Mr Shurland told Tribune Business: “Mr Smith did notify the court that the GBPA has instructed him to withdraw its undertaking not to interfere with Jarol’s business licence until the adjudication of this matter.

Frankly, we are not overly concerned about the GBPA’s intentions to withdraw their undertaking and we will get an injunction.

“When Mr. Smith made those utterances, I thought he was joking. Now I am convinced that this is plainly ‘an act of desperation by the GBPA’, especially now that the Office of the Attorney General seems to be taking this matter more seriously and, of course, supporting our position,” he added.

“Unfortunately, it appears that the GBPA is taking this matter personally between themselves and Jarol, despite the national importance and the public interest attached to clearing up who has the power and authority to license gaming in Freeport.

“In any event, we feel that we are on the right side of the law and look forward to having this matter adjudicated without further delay.”

Mr Shurland, though, agreed with the GBPA and its attorney, Fred Smith QC, that there was no need for a “preliminary trial” as argued by the Government because the same issues already formed the basis of Jarol’s case.

“Mr Smith QC objected to the preliminary issue, firstly because it was short serviced, and secondly he felt that the issues themselves were already incorporated into the main issues to be determined, which ultimately would be a waste of judicial time,” Mr Shurland said.

“I adopted his position, and the judge adjourned the matter for trial on these issues.”