Cookies Policy

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we’ll assume that you are happy to accept these cookies.To get more information about these cookies and the processing of your personal data, check our Cookies Policy.


Ince Gordon Dadds Emergency Response +442072836999

Knowledge bank
Sector Insights

Gambling Commission enforcement action arising from compliance assessments of remote casinos

07.09.2018 Gaming & Betting

Andrew Cotton

Andrew Cotton Associate and Director of Betting and Gaming

At the remote gambling sector meeting held by the Gambling Commission (“Commission”) in Birmingham on Friday 9 June 2017 the Commission announced that it would be carrying out compliance assessments on remote casino operators to review their anti-money laundering (“AML”) controls.

On Monday 26 June 2017 the 4th EU AML Directive was transposed into UK law, when the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 took effect. The regulations introduced a range of new obligations on both remote and non-remote casino operators licensed by the Gambling Commission. As the supervisory authority for casinos under the regulations, the Commission is charged with enforcing the application of and compliance with the regulations. 

At the beginning of January 2018 the Commission took the unusual step of making a public announcement that given the serious failings identified in the assessments it had already commenced formal investigations into 22 remote casino operators. In 5 cases it was considering commencing licence reviews with a view to exercising regulatory powers, being fines, suspension and revocation of licences. The Commission sent a letter to all remote casino operators advising the sector of the actions it required all licensees to take with immediate effect, which can be found on the Commission’s website.

Click here to read our update in full, including insights into the regulations behind the Commission’s letter.

Article authors:

Andrew Cotton