- Justice Alfred Mabeya dismissed the appeal filed by Claire Nyabayo saying she would be benefiting from an unjust enrichment.
- This was the amount stipulated in the terms and conditions of their contract as the maximum payout for the Magic Numbers game.
Image: FILE
A Betika gambler has lost a bid to have the betting firm pay her the Sh100 million she claims to have won in a jackpot bet.
Justice Alfred Mabeya dismissed the appeal filed by Claire Nyabayo saying she would be benefiting from an unjust enrichment which was generated by a faulty system.
Nyabayo moved to the High Court after the Betting Control and Licensing Board in June last year declined to award her the winnings made from the magic numbers game.
The board instead directed that Betika pay her Sh1 million.
This was the amount stipulated in the terms and conditions of their contract as the maximum payout for the Magic Numbers game.
Dissatisfied with the decision, Claire appealed to the High Court.
She said the board made a mistake by not directing Betika to pay the full amount of Sh100 million which represented her total winnings.
She further faulted the board for taking the manufacturer's position that the game identified and confirmed a system problem referred to as an internal bug.
But the firm in response to the appeal said the Board's decision was sound as it was consistent with the terms and conditions of the game which capped the maximum payout at Sh1 million.
The terms also stipulated that if the system generated winnings exceeding the maximum amount, such wins would not be payable.
The firm in defending itself in the appeal cited a report from the manufacturer of the game "Magic Numbers" which revealed that the multiplier was incorrectly calculated due to a flaw in the game logic, leading to an unusually high multiplier.
The Judge in dismissing the appeal agreed with the betting firm saying paying her the monies would amount to unjust enrichment.
"The evidence on record suggests that a system issue may have led to unusually high payments," he said.
He however faulted Claire for failing to attach crucial documents to support her appeal.
The documents are the terms and conditions which the betting firm relied on to cap the winnings at a maximum of Sh1 million.
The Judge said Claire denied the court a chance to test the veracity of the board's decision by failing to produce the said crucial document in her appeal.
"The burden of proof is on the person who alleges the existence of the set of circumstances he wishes the Court to believe," said Mabeya.
"In the present case, the appellant’s case is that the Board was wrong in relying on terms and conditions that were not in existence at the time she placed her wager. But she failed to produce those terms and conditions so that the Court can test them and the veracity of her claim," added the Judge.