Winston & Strawn Briefing
 

CHARLOTTE
CHICAGO
GENEVA
HONG KONG
LONDON
LOS ANGELES
MOSCOW
NEW YORK
NEWARK
PARIS
SAN FRANCISCO
WASHINGTON, D.C.

www.winston.com

 

November 2009

SPECIAL ALERT

U.K. Law on Prize Competitions receives Clarification

Article cowritten by Brian Heidelberger of Winston & Strawn and Brinsley Dresden of Lewis Silkin.

Under the Gambling Act 2005 the organisers of prize competitions in the United Kingdom must be careful to ensure that their promotions do not constitute an illegal lottery.  To fall on the legal side of the dividing line depends upon demonstrating that the participant has exercised the requisite skill, judgment or knowledge (rather than relying wholly on chance).  The Act provides in section 14(5) a test for use in borderline cases – is the competition sufficiently challenging to deter a significant proportion of potential participants from entering or to prevent a significant proportion of actual entrants from winning a prize?  The Gambling Commission has recently issued new guidance on this tricky topic, partly in response to a rash of online “win a house” competitions being used by private individuals as an alternative to selling their house by more traditional means.  The Commission’s revised advice, published in August, warns that the use of general knowledge questions “where the answer can be found with little or no effort, or in the accompanying text or narrative” is unlikely to demonstrate sufficient skill or knowledge to be legal.  Equally, if the entrant is not required to pay until after they have got the correct answer, then the question is merely a preliminary stage, while paying to enter the resulting draw amounts to an illegal lottery.  The Commission also makes clear that it will expect the organisers of prize competitions to conduct research and/or collect evidence so as to be able to demonstrate that their particular competition fulfills the section 14(5) test. 


TIP: In the U.K., if you ask participants to pay to enter a skill-based promotion, you must make sure that the questions used are not simple general knowledge questions. Despite recent guidance from the U.K. Gambling Commission, it is still unclear whether the fact that you could find the answer with some simple internet research will create a problem. If you get it wrong, your U.K. prize competition may simply be an illegal lottery!

 


If you have any questions concerning this Advertising & Promotion Law News Special Alert, please contact one of the following attorneys:
           
Chicago   Los Angeles   Paris  
Monique N. Bhargava 312-558-3732 David L. Aronoff 213-615-1866 Nathalie Hadjadj-Cazier 33 (0) 1 53 64 81 50
Stephen P. Durchslag 312-558-5288 Steven D. Atlee 213-615-1827    
Brian D. Fergemann 312-558-8024     San Francisco  
Jason W. Gordon 312-558-6145 New York   David S. Bloch 415-591-1452
Brian L. Heidelberger 312-558-5897 Michael S. Elkin 212-294-6745 Andrew P. Bridges 415-591-1482
Robert H. Newman 312-558-8125 Thomas P. Lane 212-294-6869 Kimberly A. Eckhart 415-591-6805
Mary Hutchings Reed 312-558-5721 Michael J. Friedman 212-294-2608 Jennifer A. Golinveaux 415-591-1506
Ronald Y. Rothstein 312-558-7464 Joe DiBenedetto 212-294-6709    
Liisa M. Thomas 312-558-6149 H. Joseph Mello 212-294-6736 Washington, D.C.  
Marc H. Trachtenberg 312-558-7964 Virginia R. Richard 212-294-4639 Michael L. Sibarium 202-282-5702
 

Attorney Advertising Materials

These materials have been prepared by Winston & Strawn for informational purposes only. These materials do not constitute legal advice and cannot be relied upon by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code. Receipt of this information does not create an attorney-client relationship. No reproduction or redistribution without written permission of Winston & Strawn LLP.

Along with this briefing, a library of all the Winston & Strawn LLP briefings published to date can be accessed by visiting the Publications Library section of Winston & Strawn LLP's Web site (www.winston.com).

Copyright © 2009. Winston & Strawn LLP.