Law reports: Negligence-Duty to take care-Existence of duty

The claimant was a compulsive gambler. In May 2006, he started telephone betting with the defendant. In 2004, the defendant had formulated its own codes of practice for dealing with problem gamblers.

One approach was to offer a problem gambler a form of self-exclusion agreement. In June 2006, the claimant asked the defendant to exclude him from telephone gambling for six months as he was suffering from serious gambling problems. The defendant agreed, but failed to implement its policy successfully, and permitted the claimant to continue gambling.

During the six months from June 2006, the claimant suff ered financial ruin and a deterioration in his gambling disorder. He issued proceedings contending, that the defendant had negligently failed to implement its own policy, in breach of the duty of care it had assumed towards him.

The judge found that the defendant had assumed responsibility to implement its policy