William Hill v Levy Board (are Betfair exchange users bookmakers?): Allegations, Court Orders and Status

What this case is about

R (William Hill Organisation Ltd) v Horserace Betting Levy Board is a judicial review decided by the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) as [2013] EWCA Civ 487, appealed from [2012] EWHC 2039 (Admin).

William Hill asked the court to decide whether business users of a betting exchange, Betfair's professional layers, are bookmakers who must pay the horserace betting levy.

The claim rested on section 55 of the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act 1963. The case is part of the group of Regulators and Attorneys General in Court on this site, although the dispute here was brought by an operator against a statutory body.

Who is covered

This is not a class action. The parties were William Hill Organisation Ltd and another, the Horserace Betting Levy Board, and Betfair as interested party.

The ruling affects betting exchange users and the bookmakers who compete with them, because it decides who counts as a bookmaker for levy purposes.

Is there a payout?

No payout exists for players in this case. It was a dispute between businesses over who pays a levy, and the record shows no fund, damages for players or claim process.

The only money in the record is a costs order: William Hill was ordered to pay 25% of Betfair's costs. Filing a settlement claim is free wherever a claim exists, but none exists here. GamblingLawsuits.org is not a law firm and not a claims administrator.

What the court decided

Stanley Burnton LJ first held in the High Court that exchange customers are not bookmakers. The Court of Appeal (Moses LJ, Maurice Kay LJ and Davis LJ) agreed on 3 May 2013.

The court held that exchange customers do not "receive or negotiate" bets, so they are not bookmakers under the 1963 Act. As of 14 November 2026 the status is dismissed, and the record shows no later appeal.

The wider UK picture is in Gambling Lawsuits in United Kingdom.

Why it matters

The judgment is a precedent on the meaning of "bookmaker" in levy law. It left Betfair's professional layers outside the levy under the 1963 Act.

The record states that the dispute drove the later statutory reform of the levy to cover exchanges. A court loss on the old wording therefore became a reason to change the statute.

More regulator and enforcement cases are listed under Regulators and Attorneys General in Court: Enforcement Cases Against Gambling Operators.

Questions people ask

Are Betfair exchange users bookmakers?

No, not under the 1963 Act as the Court of Appeal read it on 3 May 2013. Exchange customers do not "receive or negotiate" bets, so they fall outside the horserace betting levy.

Who paid the costs?

William Hill was ordered to pay 25% of Betfair's costs. The record shows no other money order in the case.