European Gaming Lawyer magazine Spring 2016 | Page 9

place to ensure that 118 could only search
for material relating to IDS’ use of the
database and not any other commercially
sensitive information, such as the names
of IDS’ customers or the price at which
IDS sublicensed the database. The contract
would also need to state what 118 would
be entitled to do if they discovered a
breach and, if it intended to do so, grant
118 an express right to remove the data.
In summary, granting an order for specific
performance would involve substantially
rewriting the audit provisions in the
agreement and it was not the court’s job to
do this. The application was refused.
This case demonstrates that the court is
likely to resist interpreting a contract in a
way that will grant an auditing party further
rights, particularly if these rights relate
to commercially sensitive information.
Practitioners should therefore ensure that
audit clauses in agreements are sufficiently
detailed and prescribe the exact rights that a
licensor will have to audit its licensee in the
event that it suspects breach. Alternatively,
licensors should consider whether an
inspection of premises could be avoided if
they instead oblige the licensee to provide
copy documents for inspection. However,
this obligation will likely also need to be
sufficiently certain to be enforced by specific
performance, setting out for example what
categories and formats of documents will
need to be disclosed, whether redactions
of commercially sensitive information
are permitted, whether documents must
be returned / destroyed and how they are
permitted to be used.
Legislation update
1. Gambling (Licensing and Advertising)
Act 2014 (GLAA)
Following the implementation of the point
of consumption licensing in the UK in
October 2014, the Gambling Commission
amended its Licence Conditions and Codes
of Practice (LCCP), effectively requiring
gambling operators licensed in the UK
to use only gambling software which is
manufactured, supplied and installed or
adapted by companies which hold a British
gambling software licence.
Gambling software is defined very widely
in section 41 of the Gambling Act 2005 (the

2005 Act) as computer software that is used
in connection with remote gambling.
In practice, the UKGC applies a narrow
interpretation of the definition of gambling
software to include gambling specific
applications. For example, software
used in virtual event web pages, virtual
event control, bet capture/matching, bet
settlement, random number generation
and gambling records showing detailed
results of games. In contrast, the UKGC
quite fairly recognises that software which
is used by non-gambling businesses as well
as gambling businesses, such as general
infrastructure or business applications,
should not be categorised as gambling
software for the purposes of the 2005 Act
and this would include general Salesforce,
Microsoft or Apple applications.
Generally speaking, the aim is to ensure
that those providing the technology which
impacts on the fairness of remote gambling
do so in a regulated environment.
Therefore, established and potential
gambling software providers all over the
world must now either hold UKGC licences
if they intend to service the industry, or
ensure that the software development
agreements they enter into grant the
customer (who holds its own UKGC gaming
software licence) ultimate control over the
development of the product.
2. Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA)
On 1 October 2015, the main provisions
of CRA came into force in the UK. Of
most significant interest for consumerfacing companies in the gaming software
industry, CRA represents a cutting edge
evolution of rights in respect of di