BETTING.

Thames Star, Volume LVII, Issue 15160, 22 February 1922, Page 3

BETTING.

RECOVERY OF BETS. It was cabled from England a little while ago' that in connection with the recovery of money paid by cheques in betting transactions a judge had decided that the backers claiming such money- must give the defendant bookmakers the names of the horses backed, the dates of the bets and the amount invested in each case. The ruling arose out of an action brought by Mr David Lewis, of Bishopsgate, who claimed to recover £B2 odd from Messrs Archie and Co., of E. Smithfield. Sir Harold Smith, instructed by the National Sporting League, said that no,details of. the claim had been given, plaintiff simply taking the value of the cheques which he had paid, and the Registrar had made ah order that further particulars could not be given without the discovery of defendant’s documents. Counsel said this was a growing practice of plaintiffs, who sought to have a sort of roving commission to go through the books of the bookmakers to make out their own cases. The backer had received his weekly statement in due course; otherwise he would not have paid his losses. Mr Goldsmid, for the plaintiff, said that his client made bets by telephone and kept no records, but he could give the particulars desired if he had his order for discovery of defendant’s books. Judge Parfitt, in'giving his decision, described the demand for discovery as poaching on the defendant’s preserves, and said that it was inconceivable that a betting ’ man should keep no record of his transactions; -there was, too, the fact that weekly accounts had been rendered. His Honor added: “The plaintiff must give the defendant the best particulars he can; first of the horse backed, second the dates of the bets, and third the amount of the bet in each case. Without these particulars no discovery, should be allowed. An order was therefore made for particulars within fourteen days, and for a trial at a later date.”