Phil Ivey was at the center of the attention only a few days ago, as the US court passed a decision in Borgata’s lawsuit against Ivey. While that case is still ongoing, Ivey vs Crockfords is definitely a lost cause, as the UK Court of Appeals confirmed the initial verdict in favor of Crockfords.
Ivey vs Crockfords: Initial Ruling
Back in October 2014, London’s High Court ruled against Ivey, classifying the edge sorting technique used by Ivey and his partner Cheung Yin Sun as cheating. Ivey openly admitted to using edge sorting, but he was firm in his belief that he wasn’t cheating.
Since the High Court didn’t share his view on the matter, Ivey filed an appeal with the Court of Appeal and the case was finally heard today, more than two years after the initial ruling.
Ivey vs Crockfords game over?
Three judges of the Court of Appeal considered all the facts of the case, as they were presented to them, and confirmed the verdict of the High Court. The decision means that Ivey won’t be seeing any of his $9.6 million in baccarat winnings that were withheld by the casino.
The decision still remains somewhat unclear, though. During the initial proceedings, the judge deemed Phil Ivey a truthful witness but despite of that, ruled against his claim. The Court of Appeal backed this decision, leaving many things a bit foggy.
High roller befuddled
After the Court’s ruling, Ivey shared his discontent, stating that the decision made no sense to him. Ivey’s logic is this: if he wasn’t dishonest, which seems to be a general agreement by all judges involved with the case, how can be guilty of fraud or cheating?
Can someone tell me how you can have honest cheating?
Ivey’s attorney echoed the sentiment, explaining that the Court’s ruling didn’t really shed any light on the matter of legality of Ivey’s actions. The judges seem unable to agree on the correct interpretation of the relevant section of the Gambling Act.
Supreme Court to decide in Ivey vs Crockfords case
In light of all these facts and indications, Ivey’s lawyer announced they would be moving Ivey vs Crockfords case to the next instance, which is the Supreme Court. This, of course, depends on whether the Supreme Court finds enough grounds to grant them the appeal.
Should the appeal in Ivey vs Crockfords case be accepted, this will be the last attempt for the high roller to try and receive any of his baccarat winnings. If the Supreme Court agrees with previous decisions, Ivey will be all out of luck.
As for Crockfords, they were naturally thrilled with the decision, emphasizing how they’ve been fair and honest throughout the entire matter (including the time Ivey spent playing at the tables), and were happy to see that the Court of Appeal sided with them.
Considering there is $9.6 million on the line, Ivey will most certainly not give up easily, but he might be forced to if the Supreme Court decides the Court of Appeal’s decision holds merit and there are no grounds to pursue this matter further.