Horse
racing is under no legal duty to protect victims of fraudsters with a gambling
habit. A woman who lost $141,000 lent to
notorious fraudster and problem gambler Leicester Monk failed in her claim
against the NZ Racing Board for negligence in letting Monk continue to gamble.
Televison exposure on “Fair Go” of Mr Monk’s
modus operandi saw four woman laying
complaints with the police about his behaviour in befriending vulnerable women,
borrowing money which was then lost betting both on course and through the TAB.
One woman drawn into his net after
meeting Mr Monk by chance at a car wash, sued the Racing Board claiming it was
under a legal duty to exclude the likes of Mr Monk from betting. She sued the Racing Board for the $141,080
lent to Mr Monk in some 86 separate loan transactions and further claimed
damages for mental distress caused by Mr Monk’s behaviour.
Justice Brown ruled the Racing Board owed
no legal duty to Monk’s victim. The
Board had no knowledge of or contact with any of the victims. It knew nothing of the “loans” Mr Monk had
extracted from each victim. A claim in
negligence amounted to a claim that the Racing Board owed a duty of care to any
person who might happen to meet Mr Monk and fall victim to one of his
schemes. That amounts to a duty of care
supposedly owed to New Zealanders at large.
The Racing Board cannot be held to owe a duty of care to anyone who is
at no particular risk as compared with the public generally, Justice Brown
said.
Sinclair
v. NZ Racing Board – High Court (28.08.15)
15.097