FTP lawyers fight for private hearing
Lawyers propose to settle £250,000 in unpaid licence fees if hearing takes place in private.
Full Tilt’s lawyers are currently locked in private talks with Alderney commissioners presenting their arguments why the hearing should continue to be held behind closed doors.
Today’s public hearing has so far been a dramatic and tense affair with poker pro Harry Demetriou storming out of proceedings calling FTP “corrupt” at the moment the three commissioners in charge of the hearing agreed to “grant the respondents’ case be heard in camera in the interest of justice and fairness”. This then lead to a round of spontaneous applause from those in attendance including affiliates, seasoned poker players and senior executives from the gaming industry.
As one member of the audience told eGaming Review, “this is not a historical moment it’s a very sad moment”.
The case began almost half an hour later than expected at 10.25am this morning with Tilt’s lawyers, Martin Heslop, Tony Coles and Nick Nocton from London firm Jeffrey Green Russell, arguing that the proceedings should be adjourned and “heard in camera” and “not in full blaze of publicity”.
“It is not in the interest of justice that this should be aired in public,” lead lawyer Heslop said to a packed room in the basement of the London Victoria Park Plaza hotel. “There is a real risk that it may be detrimental to these interests and highly prejudicial to this decision.”
He gave two reasons why a public hearing should be switched in favour of a private session suggesting that “highly commercially sensitive information” could be revealed, which could then have a “highly damaging effect” on any acquisition of the licences and assets by a third party. He added that “privilege versus self-incrimination” was also a factor. In other words, other proceedings, such as those in the US, would affect the respondents if the hearing continued to be held in public.
“If the hearing was held in public it would deprive the respondents of a fair trial since it would be impossible for me to deliver hearings without prejudice,” Heslop added.
Heslop even went as far as to state that eGaming Review “was proposing to report these proceedings live on the internet”.
Jason Hill, representing the AGCC, said he did not “consent to the application [for the case to be held in private] but that the body “did not oppose it.”
Responding to lead commissioner Isabel Picornel, Hill said: “It is up to FTP to satisfy you that the hearing should be held in camera. If it is [held in camera] it should be held in constant review,” Hill said.
Hill added that two of the charges against FTP related to allegations relating to non-payment of licence fees amounting to £250,000. Heslop responded by saying that if FTP’s licences were revoked “why spend £250,000 for licences that no longer exist?”
“Those fees will be paid [if the application is accepted] within seven days,” Heslop added.
Meanwhile French regulator ARJEL confirmed this morning that it will maintain the suspension of Full Tilt’s local licence.