Getting your money back

chacal

Apologies if this is in the wrong place.
I'm interested to hear what people think if an individual got quite drunk and then lost a lot of money in a casino. Perhaps it wouldn't be a legal matter but more of a moral one or do you think the casino has no obligation to review the matter and it's just tough luck? I can understand being drunk isn't an excuse but just interested in what people think in this situation

tombull82

I seen a thread on this here a while back and it seems that the casinos have themselves fairly well covered within this area AFAIK.

Do a search for same on Full boards search.

MagicSean

Do you think someone should be cleared of an assault charge because they were too drunk to know what they were doing? If a person makes the choice to drink themselves to utter stupidity they should be prepared to accept the consequences.

chacal

k_mac wrote: »

Do you think someone should be cleared of an assault charge because they were too drunk to know what they were doing? If a person makes the choice to drink themselves to utter stupidity they should be prepared to accept the consequences.

I agree with you on that point. I guess the original question was just based around the casino's duty of care to its clients. Let me ask this: What if the client was suspicious that they had a drink spiked in advance of their visit and so was not in control of all their faculties - not by choice but perhaps by carelessness?

me_right_one

By "losing" his money I assume you mean he gambled it away, as opposed to leaving his wallet behind. The odds of a roulette wheel dont have anything to do with how drunk someone is.

chacal

me_right_one wrote: »

By "losing" his money I assume you mean he gambled it away, as opposed to leaving his wallet behind. The odds of a roulette wheel dont have anything to do with how drunk someone is.

Yes - lost gambling. True, but that's not really relevant. It's the decision to actually continue gambling and drawing money that may have changed if the individual had all their faculties

me_right_one

chacal wrote: »

Yes - lost gambling. True, but that's not really relevant. It's the decision to actually continue gambling and drawing money that may have changed if the individual had all their faculties

Its exactly whats relevant. Thats what casinos are for, continious gambling. Would you have started this thread if you bet and happened to win loads of money while drunk?

chacal

me_right_one wrote: »

Its exactly whats relevant. Thats what casinos are for, continious gambling. Would you have started this thread if you bet and happened to win loads of money while drunk?

Yes I understand the service they offer. My question still stands in relation to someone who was so inebriated (and possibly after being spiked) that it should have been obvious to staff.

And I wasn't the inspiration for this thread

Farcear

me_right_one wrote: »

By "losing" his money I assume you mean he gambled it away, as opposed to leaving his wallet behind. The odds of a roulette wheel dont have anything to do with how drunk someone is.

It would also depend on what game the individual was playing:

Dealer: 19.
Homer: Hit me!
Dealer: 20.
Homer: Hit me!
Dealer: 21.
Homer: Hit me!
Dealer: 22.
Homer: D'oh!


Also, instead of looking at it from a duty of care perspective, you could argue that the individual didn't have capacity to enter into the gambling contract.

chacal

Farcear wrote: »

It would also depend on what game the individual was playing:

Dealer: 19.
Homer: Hit me!
Dealer: 20.
Homer: Hit me!
Dealer: 21.
Homer: Hit me!
Dealer: 22.
Homer: D'oh!


Also, instead of looking at it from a duty of care perspective, you could argue that the individual didn't have capacity to enter into the gambling contract.

Blackjack I believe.
Interesting point. Thanks

Our man in Havana

Gambling contracts are void ab initio.

Delancey

Haddockman wrote: »

Gambling contracts are void ab initio.

Maybe I am misunderstanding you Haddockman but does that not mean that if you bet on , say , a horse and it wins then the betting shop can refuse to pay out ?
I know nil about gambling but I have heard it's treated differently under law compared to most other businesses ?

Our man in Havana

You pretty much have it there.
A bookie could refuse to pay up on any bet and you could not sue him to enforce the contract. Granted any bookie doing so would not stay in business for very long.

FreudianSlippers

k_mac wrote: »

Do you think someone should be cleared of an assault charge because they were too drunk to know what they were doing? If a person makes the choice to drink themselves to utter stupidity they should be prepared to accept the consequences.

IIRC intoxication is a defence to crimes of specific intent.

not that it has anything to do with this thread - just thinking aloud (so to speak) :P

MrPudding

OisinT wrote: »

IIRC intoxication is a defence to crimes of specific intent.

not that it has anything to do with this thread - just thinking aloud (so to speak) :P

But is that not only if they were mistaken in the strength or effect of what they were drinking or their drink was spiked? So effectively, that they did not, themselves, intentionally get themselves drunk?

MrP

FreudianSlippers

MrPudding wrote: »

But is that not only if they were mistaken in the strength or effect of what they were drinking or their drink was spiked? So effectively, that they did not, themselves, intentionally get themselves drunk?

MrP

I think you may be correct. I seem to remember that self-induced intoxication cannot be a defence (but I may be thinking of the LRC paper on reform in this area)

MrPudding

OisinT wrote: »

I think you may be correct. I seem to remember that self-induced intoxication cannot be a defence (but I may be thinking of the LRC paper on reform in this area)

That seems to be the position in the UK. There have, apparently, been cases where D had a few drinks to raise some Dutch courage and then tried to use intoxication as a defence.

So in the UK intoxication can be a defence in some circumstances. UK and Irish law appears to be quite similar in places so it might be the same in this respect.

MrP