Jackpot Justice Served: Corrinne Durber vs. Paddy Power
UK Gardener Triumphs in Court Against Paddy Power to Secure £1m Victory in Legal Dispute
In a sweet victory for a gardener from Gloucestershire, Corrinne Durber scored a massive win against online gaming giant Paddy Power. The UK High Court ruled in her favor, awarding her a payout of £1 million ($1.3 million) instead of the daily prize of around $26k+ that Paddy Power initially attempted to offer.
According to the legal ruling, Mr. Justice Ritchie deemed that Paddy Power should pay Corrinne Durber the sum, rejecting the argument that a computer glitch had pointed to the wrong prize. The decision came as a summary judgment in Durber's favor, which means she secured her breach of contract case against Paddy Power without a trial[BBC].
The showdown began in October 2020, when Durber was playing an iCasino game operated by Paddy Power. Believing she had hit the jackpot, Durber's iPad screen displayed a win of over £1 million. Fast forward to Wednesday, and Justice Ritchie ruled in favor of the "what you see is what you get" principle, stating that players anticipate their in-game outcomes to be correct[1].
Justice Ritchie's decision emphasized that operators, like Paddy Power, should not pass the blame onto customers for their own recklessness, negligence, errors, inadequate digital services, and inadequate testing[3]. The disappointment is palpable as Durber expressed her frustration at the prolonged legal battle.
"Why not just 'pay up straight away?'" Durber inquired, reacting to the payout outside the court on Wednesday[5]. After all, the £1 million will not only ensure a comfortable retirement for Durber but also help provide for her children. Yet, her victory was bittersweet, as she expressed regret for ever placing a bet with Paddy Power and advised others to be wary of their gaming practices.
In response to the court's ruling and Corrinne Durber's remarks, Flutter Entertainment, Paddy Power's parent company, issued a statement stating, "we deeply regret this unfortunate case and are reviewing the judgment." For Corrinne Durber, her courage has paid off and set an important precedent for players and operators alike.
[1] - Computer glitch or deception? UK court sides with player in £1m Paddy Power jackpot dispute[2] - Paddy Power must pay £1m jackpot to woman after glitch, court rules[3] - UK High Court orders Paddy Power to pay out £1m jackpot to player after computer glitch[4] - Paddy Power ordered to pay £1m jackpot to customer after 'computer glitch'[5] - 'I've had it': Paddy Power v rebel gambler 'won't bet with them again,' claims £1m jackpot (*NSFW language warning*)[6] - Paddy Power ordered to pay out £1m jackpot to woman after 'computer glitch'
- Corrinne Durber, the gardener from Gloucestershire, will now live a comfortably retired lifestyle thanks to her home-and-garden and lifestyle being secured by a big-win at the casino-games section of Paddy Power, a UK-based casino-and-gambling company.
- Despite the unforeseen jackpot, Durber's victory came as a result of Paddy Power's negligence and inadequate digital services, with a failure to properly test the sportsbook games before they were offered to customers.
- Lamenting the long battle with Paddy Power, Durber has encouraged others to be mindful of their games and practices, urging caution in the home-and-garden sector of casino-and-gambling establishments like Paddy Power.
- Following Durber's court victory, Flutter Entertainment (Paddy Power's parent company) recognized their missteps and released a statement demonstrating regret for the case, promising a review of their systems and procedures.
- Justice Ritchie's summary judgment underscored that operators like Paddy Power should not impose the burden of blame on customers for their own reckless actions, emphasizing that players anticipate their in-game outcomes to be accurate according to the 'what you see is what you get' principle.
- Lotteries and gaming enthusiasts alike are celebrating the historic precedent set by Durber's jackpot justice, as the ruling signifies a shift in the way operators are held accountable for their technological missteps, ensuring fairness across the online gaming sector.
