Entain Faces Australian Class Action Over Fast Code Betting Compliance

Entain, the operator of the Neds and Ladbrokes betting brands in Australia, is defending itself against a class action lawsuit brought by customers who lost money through its Fast Code betting service. The Supreme Court of Victoria has ordered the company to notify all affected customers about the proceedings and explain their rights. The case centers on whether Fast Code complied with Australia's Interactive Gambling Act 2001 (IGA), which prohibits online in-play sports betting once a sporting event has begun.

Fast Code operated through an alphanumeric code system that allowed customers to select in-play wagers online and then communicate those codes through an automated telephone service to complete the bet. This approach was designed to work within an IGA exception permitting telephone-based wagers placed wholly by voice. However, Australian gambling legislation changes introduced in 2016 and enacted in 2017 were intended to close such loopholes by requiring telephone betting services to be conducted entirely through voice communication, without alphanumeric codes or online selections.

The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) investigated Fast Code and similar products, concluding in December 2023 that several operators, including Entain, had breached the IGA. ACMA's findings indicated that key information such as bet selection, bet type, stake, and wager confirmation needed to be communicated entirely through telephone calls. After operators completed system changes to comply with these findings, ACMA did not pursue enforcement action.

The class action covers customers who used Fast Code between March 4, 2019, and March 4, 2025, and allegedly suffered losses. Entain maintains that its service complied with Australian gambling laws and notes that following the system changes, Fast Codes were generated before sporting events began and were generic rather than based on individual customer selections.

Entain has filed a counterclaim with significant financial implications. The company argues that if losing bets must be refunded due to the alleged illegality of Fast Code, it should be entitled to recover winnings previously paid to customers who participated in the system. This positions the lawsuit as potentially costly for both sides, depending on the net balance of losses versus winnings across the class period.

This case reflects broader regulatory scrutiny of betting operators in Australia and the challenges they face in interpreting and complying with complex gambling legislation. The outcome may influence how other operators structure their in-play betting services and could establish important precedent regarding the enforceability of IGA restrictions on online in-play betting. The automatic inclusion of affected customers in the class action lowers barriers to participation and may result in a substantial class size, amplifying the financial stakes for Entain.