Sportsbet, Tabcorp, and Entain sued over responsible gambling failures in Australia

Dig Deeper

Related stories

2025/10/22: Bookmakers drop state leagues in Football Australia betting fee dispute 2025/02/21: Entain Australia executive resigns amid money laundering scandal 2025/08/27: Entain Australia appoints Andrew Vouris as Chief Executive 2025/08/05: Sportsbet faces scrutiny over multi-bet ads on AFL website

The Backstory

Why this lawsuit landed now

Australia’s online wagering sector has been moving toward a reckoning. Years of rapid growth, VIP-driven marketing and fragmented oversight have collided with tougher expectations on harm minimization and financial crime controls. Operators have trimmed television ads, faced integrity reviews and fought over the cost of access to sports. Regulators have stepped up legal action. Against that backdrop, the allegations at the heart of this case — that bookmakers accepted stolen money and overlooked obvious warning signs — arrive as the industry’s conduct faces unprecedented scrutiny and the courts start to test long-standing regulatory interpretations.

The tensions have been building on multiple fronts. A push to limit gambling exposure in mainstream broadcasts has not stopped a shift online, where promotions remain aggressive and targeted. At the same time, leagues and betting firms are renegotiating the price of data and rights at a moment when match-fixing fears are rising. And one of the biggest operators in the market, Entain, is defending a major money-laundering lawsuit that could redefine compliance obligations. Each thread raises the same question: how far should the industry go to police itself — and what happens when it does not.

AUSTRAC tests the limits — and revises its case

Entain’s legal fight with Australia’s financial crime watchdog has become a bellwether for enforcement after years of negotiated settlements across the sector. The regulator originally alleged broad failures to detect and report suspicious activity by high-risk customers across the Ladbrokes and Neds brands. But in a notable shift, AUSTRAC recently pared back its statement of claim, removing allegations tied to so-called remittance arrangements after the agency’s own guidance undermined those charges. The case continues and still carries exposure in the tens of millions of dollars per breach.

That retrenchment, detailed in a revised filing, underscores how unsettled some obligations remain — and why the courts’ interpretations matter. AUSTRAC, which has never secured a judgment on its reading of key anti-money-laundering rules, is also awaiting a Federal Court decision in a separate case against Star Casinos that could shape strategy and penalties industrywide. The update came only weeks after leadership changes at Entain’s regional unit, signaling a parallel corporate push to steady compliance and culture even as the legal fight continues. Read more in AUSTRAC drops key allegations in Entain money-laundering case: Australian financial intelligence agency AUSTRAC has dropped a series of claims against betting company Entain.

Executive churn and a new playbook at Entain ANZ

The courtroom pressure has fed into a reshaping of Entain’s leadership in Australia and New Zealand. The company has seen a string of departures since AUSTRAC launched proceedings in December, including the resignation of its Australia chief financial officer, Lachlan Fitt. His exit followed other senior changes across the region and came amid heightened board focus on risk management and regulatory posture. Coverage of the departures is here: Entain Australia executive resigns amid money laundering scandal.

Amid the churn, Entain named Andrew Vouris as chief executive for the ANZ division, elevating him from interim status. The appointment formalizes a mandate to tighten compliance and reset commercial priorities across Ladbrokes and Neds. Vouris, a former Tabcorp executive with esports and racing experience, has cast the strategy as “win, but not at all costs,” signaling a pivot toward controls and sustainability over pure turnover growth. Details on the leadership move: Entain Australia appoints Andrew Vouris as Chief Executive.

The leadership recalibration is not occurring in isolation. It sits alongside mounting public and political criticism of how operators cultivate and retain high-value customers, including VIP programs that have drawn regulator fines in past cases. The allegations in the current suit — that inducements and personalized outreach continued despite red flags — cut to the core of those practices.

Advertising pivots expose a regulatory gap

Even as companies temper above-the-line marketing, they have leaned into digital channels and product features that drive volumes. Sportsbet’s recent promotion of expanded same-game multi-bets on the Australian Football League’s website — after pulling similar ads from free-to-air TV — illustrates the shift. The online placements did not violate current rules, but they drew fire from lawmakers and harm-minimization advocates who argued the industry is exploiting loopholes while resisting stronger limits.

The episode has strengthened calls for comprehensive advertising reform rather than piecemeal restrictions. It also shows how league partnerships and revenue-sharing arrangements can create misaligned incentives when integrity risks rise alongside betting engagement. For more, see Sportsbet faces scrutiny over multi-bet ads on AFL website: Australian sports betting company Sportsbet has been criticized for promoting its expanded same-game multi-bets on the Australian Football League’s website.

These advertising dynamics feed directly into the responsible-gambling debate at the heart of the current litigation. If operators continue pushing complex, high-margin products in web environments less constrained than broadcast, regulators may seek broader bans — elevating the stakes of compliance failures alleged in court.

Fees, integrity and a market at loggerheads

Meanwhile, bookmakers and football authorities have clashed over product fees that fund competition oversight and data. In a pointed standoff, major operators including Tabcorp, Sportsbet and Entain withdrew markets on state-level soccer amid a proposal that would raise payments to Football Australia, potentially to almost 30% of revenue on some games. The dispute highlights tightening margins as compliance costs increase and leagues seek more from betting partnerships to address integrity risks.

The negotiations land as Victoria’s gambling regulator reviews Football Australia’s betting integrity framework after match-fixing cases involving A-League players. Bookmakers have warned they could pull A-League markets if the fee hike proceeds, a move that would dent handle and visibility but also reduce exposure to integrity challenges. The fee fight reflects a broader recalibration of who pays for risk in Australia’s wagering ecosystem. Full context here: Bookmakers drop state leagues in Football Australia betting fee dispute.

The integrity debate converges with allegations in the lawsuit that operators failed to verify the source of funds and ignored indicators of problem gambling. Both issues speak to the same risk-management core: the systems and incentives that govern when to say no to bets, even at the cost of short-term revenue.

What to watch as the legal pressure builds

The case targeting Sportsbet, Tabcorp and Entain will test how Australian courts view the duty of care owed by bookmakers when customers show markers of harm or suspicious activity. A ruling that expands liability could accelerate a shift from voluntary codes to firm mandates around VIP programs, source-of-funds checks and inducements. It would also ripple into ongoing enforcement, including AUSTRAC’s action against Entain and any penalties that flow from the Star Casinos decision.

Operators are already repositioning, from leadership changes to marketing adjustments and public commitments to “compliance-led” cultures. But the immediate risk is legal, not reputational: each proven breach can carry multimillion-dollar penalties, and a precedent on systemic failures could reshape how products are designed, how accounts are monitored and how quickly operators intervene. With regulators and leagues tightening scrutiny and political appetite for tougher rules returning, the outcome of this lawsuit will help set the boundaries for how Australia’s wagering industry grows — and how it is held to account.