Elite Bingo yesterday failed in its high court bid to review and set aside the award of bingo licences to two other companies in King William’s Town and Uitenhage.
Grahamstown High Court Judge Jeremy Pickering found that the Eastern Cape Gambling and Betting Board had been scrupulously fair and even indulgent in their dealings with Elite Bingo (KWT) and Elite Bingo (UTH), whose respective bids for the King William’s Town and Uitenhage licences had been disqualified.
In both cases, Elite Bingo had failed to timeously get the necessary special consent from the respective municipalities for their premises to be used as bingo halls.
As a result, they were excluded from the process and the King William’s Town bingo licence was instead in 2014 awarded to Galaxy Gaming Eastern Cape 2 and the Uitenhage licence to East Cape Gaming Uitenhage.
Both companies had obtained the necessary special consent for their premises to be used as bingo halls.
Elite Bingo contended during legal argument that a bingo hall fell within the ambit of the definition of “place of amusement” and special consent was therefore not necessary as it had already zoned its premises accordingly.
The Uitenhage municipal regulations define a “place of amusement” as any “building designed for use as a public hall, theatre, cinema, music hall, billiards saloon, sport arena, skating ring, or dance hall or for the purpose of exhibitions of trade or industry”.
Advocate Ben Ford, SC, said during argument that people derived amusement from playing the game of bingo and any “sensible interpretation” of the definition of “place of amusement” would include a Bingo Hall.
But Pickering rejected this.
He said the zoning scheme predated the legalisation of gambling in the country and could never have contemplated including a building meant for gambling.
He said bingo was defined in the Gambling Act as a gambling game – in which money might be won – as opposed to an amusement game in which no monetary prizes could be won.
He said a bingo hall had little in common with the type of activities referred to in the definition of “place of amusement”.
“At the risk of being thought irrational or unrealistic as opposed to ‘sensible’, I am of the view that Mr Ford’s contentions with regard to the correct interpretation of ‘places of amusement’ cannot be upheld.”
While he conceded that many gamblers might derive amusement from their activities, it could never be suggested that a casino would fall within the ambit of the definition of a ‘place of amusement’.
“No doubt in Roman times the populace flocked to the Colosseum in order to derive amusement from the sight of Christians being torn apart by lions or gladiators fighting to the death but that would not render the Colosseum a ‘place of amusement’ having regard to the type of activities set out in the Scheme Regulations.”
He said in respect of both the Uitenhage and King William’s Town licences, the board had acted in an administratively fair manner and that its decision to disqualify Elite Bingo in both cases had been lawful, reasonable and rational.
He dismissed the application and ordered Elite Bingo to pay the legal costs.
Elite Bingo loses bid for King, Uitenhage premises’ licences
Grahamstown High Court Judge Jeremy Pickering found that the Eastern Cape Gambling and Betting Board had been scrupulously fair and even indulgent in their dealings with Elite Bingo (KWT) and Elite Bingo (UTH), whose respective bids for the King William’s Town and Uitenhage licences had been disqualified.
In both cases, Elite Bingo had failed to timeously get the necessary special consent from the respective municipalities for their premises to be used as bingo halls.
As a result, they were excluded from the process and the King William’s Town bingo licence was instead in 2014 awarded to Galaxy Gaming Eastern Cape 2 and the Uitenhage licence to East Cape Gaming Uitenhage.
Both companies had obtained the necessary special consent for their premises to be used as bingo halls.
Elite Bingo contended during legal argument that a bingo hall fell within the ambit of the definition of “place of amusement” and special consent was therefore not necessary as it had already zoned its premises accordingly.
The Uitenhage municipal regulations define a “place of amusement” as any “building designed for use as a public hall, theatre, cinema, music hall, billiards saloon, sport arena, skating ring, or dance hall or for the purpose of exhibitions of trade or industry”.
Advocate Ben Ford, SC, said during argument that people derived amusement from playing the game of bingo and any “sensible interpretation” of the definition of “place of amusement” would include a Bingo Hall.
But Pickering rejected this.
He said the zoning scheme predated the legalisation of gambling in the country and could never have contemplated including a building meant for gambling.
He said bingo was defined in the Gambling Act as a gambling game – in which money might be won – as opposed to an amusement game in which no monetary prizes could be won.
He said a bingo hall had little in common with the type of activities referred to in the definition of “place of amusement”.
“At the risk of being thought irrational or unrealistic as opposed to ‘sensible’, I am of the view that Mr Ford’s contentions with regard to the correct interpretation of ‘places of amusement’ cannot be upheld.”
While he conceded that many gamblers might derive amusement from their activities, it could never be suggested that a casino would fall within the ambit of the definition of a ‘place of amusement’.
“No doubt in Roman times the populace flocked to the Colosseum in order to derive amusement from the sight of Christians being torn apart by lions or gladiators fighting to the death but that would not render the Colosseum a ‘place of amusement’ having regard to the type of activities set out in the Scheme Regulations.”
He said in respect of both the Uitenhage and King William’s Town licences, the board had acted in an administratively fair manner and that its decision to disqualify Elite Bingo in both cases had been lawful, reasonable and rational.
He dismissed the application and ordered Elite Bingo to pay the legal costs.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending Now
Latest Videos