Although overall gaming revenue is down C$1.3bn from last year and two casinos have filed for protection against creditors, the province remains one of Canada's largest gaming markets.

A High Court case brought by a problem gambler against bookmaker William Hill is set to draw widespread media attention to self exclusion agreements, as well as compelling gambling operators to formulate more comprehensive exclusion policies and procedures, as per their obligations under the 2005 Gambling Act.

A self-excluded gambler has failed in his bid to recover more than £2m in losses from William Hill. A High Court judge ruled that William Hill could not be liable for Graham Calvert’s losses despite the fact that he had asked to be excluded from betting with the bookmaker. Regardless of yesterday’s ruling, self exclusion seems set to remain one of the key compliance concerns of UK gambling operators.

The Federal Court of Justice has clarified an earlier court ruling which established that casinos have a contractual obligation to take ‘reasonable efforts’ to ensure that slot machine players are not self-excluded gamblers, who may be reimbursed with their losses if casinos fail to fulfil this duty. However, the Federal Court has said that compensation is not due in cases that precede the establishment of the casinos’ duty of care in the December 2005 ruling.

In the final part of a review of the 3rd Annual Legal and Business Guide to Gaming in Canada Conference, held in Toronto at the end of February, Christine Mingie, barrister and solicitor with Vancouver law firm Lang Michener, analyses debate surrounding self-exclusion programmes and the duty of care owed by Canadian casinos to their customers.

The 2005 Gambling Act lists the protection of children and other vulnerable people from exploitation as one of its core objectives. On this issue, the intent of the Gambling Commission is clear, but some of the practical questions raised by the new Act are more complex.

In formulating their self-exclusion policies and procedures, operators in Great Britain should consider the risk that self-excluded gamblers could successfully sue operators if they are subsequently allowed to bet.

Software providers speaking at last week’s Canadian Gaming Summit in Montreal demonstrated how biometric recognition systems can be incorporated into terrestrial gaming operations in order to tackle issues relating to cheating, money laundering and self-exclusion agreements. But whilst biometrics are already being used in casino security programs in four Canadian provinces, the software has thrown up some compliance concerns regarding privacy laws.

Gambling in Ontario is under the control of a powerful monopoly, the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation (OLG). The OLG is a provincial Crown agency that operates and manages lotteries, casinos and slots facilities at horse racing tracks. Ontario is one of the world's foremost jurisdiction in the areas of problem gambling research and treatment.

The province of Alberta will make almost 50 per cent more money from gambling tax revenue than it does from oil, according to budget forecasters.