UKGC: Gambling Firm Owner Identities Are Private
A Freedom of Information request about McBookies' ownership reveals the limits of public transparency regarding the individuals behind licensed operators.
The UK Gambling Commission has clarified that it will not release the personal details of individuals who own licensed gambling companies, citing data protection laws. This was revealed in a response to a Freedom of Information request about the ownership of McBookies. The decision highlights the boundary between corporate transparency and personal privacy in the UK gambling industry.
Article Content
A Freedom of Information (FOI) disclosure from the UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) has confirmed that the identities of individuals who own licensed gambling companies will not be made public, highlighting a significant boundary in regulatory transparency.
The response, prompted by a request dated 23 June 2023 about the ownership of the betting brand McBookies, clarifies the distinction the regulator makes between a licensed corporate entity and its individual owners.
Corporate vs. Personal Ownership
The FOI request simply asked: "Who owns Mcbookie." In its response, the Commission stated that McBookies is a domain name registered to the licensed operator Star Racing Limited. The UKGC maintains a public register where consumers can view the licence details for all approved operators, including the various domain names they operate.
However, when it came to identifying the specific individuals who own Star Racing Limited, the Commission withheld the information. The UKGC explained that this information constitutes personal data and is therefore exempt from disclosure under section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
The regulator argued that releasing these details would be disproportionate and unfair, stating that individuals involved with an operator have a "legitimate expectation that their personal details will not be disclosed."
The Public Interest Test
Crucially, the UKGC's decision rested on its assessment of public interest. The response noted that personal data can be disclosed if there is a strong public interest in doing so. However, in this case, the Commission concluded, "On balance, there is no legitimate public interest in disclosing this information and it would not be fair to do so."
This sets a clear precedent for consumers and researchers: while the UKGC provides transparency about the licensed company, it considers the identities of the ultimate beneficial owners to be private information, protected by the Data Protection Act 2018, unless a compelling public interest argument can be made.
Significance for Consumers
This disclosure is important for consumers who wish to conduct due diligence on gambling operators. It confirms that while you can identify the company holding the UK licence for a betting site, you cannot use the UKGC's public resources or FOI process to find out who the individual owners and shareholders are.
For consumers, this means that the trail of accountability, from a public perspective, stops at the corporate level. While the UKGC holds this information for its own regulatory and due diligence purposes, it is not available for public scrutiny. This case demonstrates the ongoing tension between the public's right to know and an individual's right to privacy within the framework of UK gambling regulation.