Merkur Slots
Request
Please provide the following information specifically regarding Merkur Slots UK Ltd and any of its venues, brands or subsidiaries:
- A list of all meetings or visits (in-person or virtual) between Gambling Commission staff and Merkur representatives or venues between 1 November 2024 and 31 January 2025.
2.For each meeting or visit, please provide:
- The date of the meeting or visit
- The location or format (e.g. in-person at venue, remote via Teams, etc.)
- The purpose or subject matter discussed (as recorded in any agenda, meeting notes, or calendar entry)
- The Gambling Commission staff or department involved.
Response
Thank you for your request which has been processed under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).
In your email you have requested:
‘Please provide the following information specifically regarding Merkur Slots UK Ltd and any of its venues, brands or subsidiaries:
- A list of all meetings or visits (in-person or virtual) between Gambling Commission staff and Merkur representatives or venues between 1 November 2024 and 31 January 2025.
2.For each meeting or visit, please provide:
- The date of the meeting or visit
- The location or format (e.g. in-person at venue, remote via Teams, etc.)
- The purpose or subject matter discussed (as recorded in any agenda, meeting notes, or calendar entry)
- The Gambling Commission staff or department involved.’
The Gambling Commission can confirm that a meeting took place with Merkur Slots on 19 April 2024.
However, any further detail in relation to this meeting is exempt under section 31(1)(g) of the FOIA.
Law Enforcement – Section 31
Section 31(1)(g) exempts information whose disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice the exercise by any public authority of its functions for any of the purposes specified in subsection (2).
The Commission considers the subsections below apply and therefore the information is exempt from disclosure:
i. Subsection 31(2)(b) refers to the purpose of ascertaining whether any person is responsible for any conduct which is improper,
ii. Subsection 31(2)(c) refers to the purpose of ascertaining whether circumstances which would justify regulatory action in pursuance of any enactment exist or may arise,
iii. Subsection 31(2)(d) refers to the purpose of ascertaining a person’s fitness or competence in relation to the management of bodies corporate or in relation to any profession or other activity which he is, or seeks to become, authorised to carry on.
It is our view that the regulatory functions of the Commission, would be prejudiced by disclosure of this information as it would:
i. prejudice the Commission’s ability to fulfil its statutory functions by revealing how the Commission assesses operators’ and individuals as well as applications for regulatory purposes, and
ii. prejudice the Commission’s compliance and enforcement activity and ability to raise overall standards in the gambling industry as it would undermine the trust the Commission has gained with operators in terms of disclosing information where it is necessary and proportionate and to cooperate in an open manner.
The Commission therefore concludes that the disclosure of this information would prejudice the regulatory functions of the Commission.
Arguments in favour of disclosure:
- The Commission is a public body which is required to regulate the gambling industry in the public interest. There is therefore a public interest in members of the public having confidence the Commission is being open and honest with the information it holds so that it can be held to account.
- It is important that the public are assured that the Commission is carrying out its functions in ensuring that any individuals or organisations who are involved in providing gambling facilities to the public have undergone the necessary assessments and will uphold the licencing objectives ensuring that consumers are protected.
- Disclosure of the requested information could demonstrate to stakeholders and relevant parties how the Commission is assessing licensees and, furthermore, this disclosure may encourage stakeholders to work with us and contribute to our programme of work, increasing confidence in the Commission as a regulator and its ability to uphold the law.
Arguments in favour of maintaining the exemption:
- The Commission has robust and effective processes and procedures in place which are utilised when assessing existing licensees. These procedures and processes have been put in place to minimise the risk of an operator continuing to provide gambling services where they do not meet the required standards. This demonstrates to the public at large that they can have confidence in the Commission’s compliance assessment processes.
- There is an expectation of confidence in much of the Commission’s work, particularly when discussing areas of a licensee’s compliance with the LCCP. It is the impact on this work of the Commission which is more likely to be affected by disclosure.
- Disclosing this level of detail is likely to reveal the techniques the Commission uses in general when conducting investigations. This could severely hamper the effectiveness of the Commission’s investigatory processes in future cases.
- It could seriously impact the Commission’s investigation process, if information relating to what information it uses to inform the licence review process became known; this is strongly not in the public interest as it would impair the Commission’s ability to regulate effectively.
- Disclosure of this information would also undermine the Commission's ability to uphold the licensing objectives which would impact on the trust and confidence of the public in it as a regulator.
- Further, disclosure of the requested information would prejudice the outcome of future assessments by the Commission by exposing assessment techniques and practices to the detriment of the public interest.
Weighing the balance
The Commission acknowledges that there is a public interest in promoting the accountability and transparency of public authorities and the importance of having sufficient information in the public domain to support consumers with their choice of operator, however, disclosure of the information would be damaging to the Commission as a regulatory body which ultimately serves to protect the wider public interest.
It is important that the public are assured that the Commission is carrying out its functions in ensuring that any individuals/organisations who are involved in providing gambling facilities to the public have undergone the necessary assessments and will uphold the licencing objectives ensuring that consumers are protected.
However, there is a strong public interest in preserving the processes that the Commission has in place to assess operators’ compliance with the LCCP and identify any operators who will be unable to comply with the licensing requirements. The public trust that the Commission has robust processes in place to assess operators so that when they use the services provided by an operator, they are confident that there has been sufficient scrutiny of that operator to ensure that they are protected. If this information were released it would undermine that confidence.
We consider that the public interest is better served by withholding this information, ensuring that consumers are protected through our processes rather than releasing information about our processes which in our view will not benefit the public as a whole.
Review of the decision
If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your Freedom of Information request you are entitled to an internal review of our decision. You should write to FOI Team, Gambling Commission, 4th floor, Victoria Square House, Victoria Square, Birmingham, B2 4BP or by reply to this email.
Please note, internal review requests should be made within 40 working days of the initial response. Requests made outside this timeframe will not be processed.
If you are not content with the outcome of our review, you may then apply directly to the Information Commissioner (ICO) for a decision. Generally, the ICO cannot make a decision unless you have already exhausted the review procedure provided by the Gambling Commission.
It should be noted that if you wish to raise a complaint with the ICO about the Commission’s handling of your request for information, then you are required to do so within six weeks of receiving your final response or last substantive contact with us.
The ICO can be contacted at: The Information Commissioner’s Office (opens in a new tab), Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.
Information Management Team
Gambling Commission