Singaporean high roller ordered to pay Australia casino over A$38 million in gambling debt

SINGAPORE: A Singaporean businessman was ordered to pay over A$38 million (S$33.7 million) after racking up a huge gambling debt at a Gold Coast casino, an Australian court ruled on Monday (Sep 9).
Judge Melanie Hindman, from the Supreme Court in Brisbane, ruled that Wong Yew Choy – who lost his money at The Star Gold Coast casino in Queensland – would also have to pay the casino’s costs and interest dating back to September 2018.
According to court documents, Dr Wong was invited to The Star casino in July 2018. He would then incur a loss of A$47,300,000 in baccarat, a type of casino card game, in the span of a few days.
But after rebates and other allowances under an agreement with the casino, the losses were reduced to A$43,209,853.22.
Dr Wong then left Australia without settling his account with the casino, which the judge noted was “not unusual”.
To recover the debt, The Star Gold Coast used a blank cheque provided by Dr Wong on a previous gambling trip to The Star Sydney.
However, the cheque bounced as Dr Wong had instructed his bank in August 2018 not to honour any cheques drawn from his account by The Star Gold Coast.
The casino made written demands to Dr Wong but he refused to pay, citing an agreement he had made with casino’s chief operating officer Paul Arbuckle that he did not have to pay for any losses incurred up to July 2018.
The casino sued Dr Wong in 2019 to recover the A$43 million, escalating the matter to Singapore’s High Court. The case was dismissed in 2020, with the judge concluding that there were issues of fact that could not be determined short of a trial.
Court documents showed that Dr Wong played baccarat at The Star, but had complained about the way casino dealers had dealt the cards to him on several incidents.
Dr Wong initially stopped gambling following those incidents, with the casino agreeing that he had proper reason to complain, though he later resumed gaming.
Following a conversation between Dr Wong and Mr Arbuckle, the COO later issued a letter of apology with regard to the baccarat incidents.
Dr Wong alleged that during their conversation, there was also a verbal agreement by Mr Arbuckle that the Singaporean would not have to pay for any losses incurred to that date.
Mr Arbuckle denied making any such agreement with Dr Wong, and the apology letter also did not mention waiving the businessman’s debts.
“The alleged agreement pleaded by Dr Wong is not evidenced by the letter of apology or otherwise supported by any other evidence adduced in the trial,” said Justice Hindman.
The judge also noted that the alleged agreement pleaded by Dr Wong is materially different to the evidence he gave orally at trial.
“The plaintiff has made out its loan claim, and the defendant has not made out any defence to that claim. I will enter judgment for the plaintiff with interest and costs,” she said.
While Dr Wong had incurred a loss of A$43,209,853.22, the casino reduced the amount by A$4,550,000 for reasons not presently material, court documents showed.
Thus the sum sought by the casino from Dr Wong is A$38,659,853.22 plus interest and costs.