The ultimate appellate court for Macau has reportedly found local casino operators MGM China Holdings Limited and Wynn Macau Limited ‘jointly and severally liable’ for nine junket-related deposits.

According to a report from Inside Asian Gaming, the enclave’s Court of Final Appeal heard the nine cases over the course of the first two months of the year after the casino operating pair had lost their initial legal actions before the Court of First Instance and subsequent appeals to the Court of Second Instance.

Pricey partnerships:

Inside Asian Gaming reported that eight of the nine actions related to the 2015 theft of almost $89.18 million from a VIP room run by junket firm Dore Entertainment Company Limited within Wynn Macau Limited’s 1,000-room Wynn Macau property. The source detailed that the remaining case concerned a high-stakes lounge operated by rival junket giant Suncity Group with the permission of MGM China Holdings Limited.

Operator obligations:

In every one of the nine cases and the Court of Final Appeal reportedly found that Dore Entertainment Company Limited and Suncity Group had rejected customer attempts to withdraw funds previously deposited. The court purportedly moreover decided that Wynn Macau Limited and MGM China Holdings Limited, which are subsidiaries of American casino behemoths Wynn Resorts Limited and MGM Resorts International respectively, are jointly liable for the return of this cash as it had been handed over within their venues.

A statement from the Court of Final Appeal reportedly read…

“It would not be logical that the development of the activities included in the gaming concession could be carried out for the benefit of the concessionaire by other entities contracted for this purpose without resulting in any liability for the damage caused by the activity that these same entities could cause.”

Earlier excoriation:

These latest determinations reportedly followed a November decision from the Court of Final Appeal to uphold a Court of Second Instance ruling from 2018 that held Wynn Macau Limited and Dore Entertainment Company Limited jointly liable for the return of a VIP deposit worth about $764,300. This purportedly prompted the Hong Kong-headquartered casino firm also behind the Wynn Palace Cotai venue to establish a special $7.9 million fund to defend itself against similar litigation.

Succinct statute:

In making its ruling, the Court of Final Appeal reportedly cited the liability responsibility referenced under Article 48F(2) of Macau’s incoming gaming law, which holds ‘concessionaires are jointly and severally liable for the liability of their gaming promoters arising from carrying out gaming promotion activities in their casinos.’