header-logo header-logo

13 February 2026 / Mark Pawlowski
Issue: 8149 / Categories: Features , Dispute resolution
printer mail-detail

Winners & losers!

242551
Mark Pawlowski takes a look at some of the legal pitfalls associated with lottery syndicates

It is not uncommon for a number of people to form a syndicate to subscribe for weekly tickets to the National Lottery. Invariably, there will be no written rules of the syndicate and the members will rarely consider the question of how any winnings (large or small) should be divided, particularly in the event of a member failing to pay the required sum or if the required subscription is paid not by the member themselves but by a partner or friend. To whom will the winnings belong in these circumstances?

It’s all mine!

In Abrahams v Trustee of the property of Abrahams [1999] Lexis Citation 3432, the claimant, who was separated from her husband, paid £1 a week for her own place in a lottery syndicate, plus a further £1 for her husband. The syndicate won over £3m , and the claimant’s one-fifteenth share amounted to £242,155.13. The claimant, however, also claimed her husband’s share, relying on the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Seddons GSC—Ben Marks

Seddons GSC—Ben Marks

Partner joins residential real estate team

Winckworth Sherwood—Shazia Bashir

Winckworth Sherwood—Shazia Bashir

Social housing team announces partner appointment

University of Manchester: The LLM driving tech-focused career growth

University of Manchester: The LLM driving tech-focused career growth

Manchester’s online LLM has accelerated career progression for its graduates

NEWS
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll