This box is not visible in the printed version.
Request date: 12 May 2026
This version was printed or saved on: 8 September 2026
Online version: https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/about-us/freedomofinformation/sports-spread-betting
Using the search terms "Sports Spread Betting", "Non-Financial Spread Bets", and "FCA" as suggested in your response, please provide:
Thank you for your request which has been processed under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).
In your email you have requested the following information using the search terms "Sports Spread Betting", "Non-Financial Spread Bets", and "FCA":
Firstly, the Gambling Commission (the Commission) apologises for the delay in responding to your FOI request.
Upon receipt of your FOI request, the Commission commenced a review of any information falling within the scope of your request. During this review, we considered that a qualified exemption may be engaged, which required the application of a public interest test. We advised that we would require an additional 20 working days to consider the public interest test and provided you with a deadline of 8 July 2026.
During that period the Commission also sought representations from a third party which it took into account in coming to its decision. This is standard practice for the Commission, particularly when third party information is potentially disclosable. This process took longer than anticipated. We recognise this response is later than we had initially indicated and apologise for the delay in being able to reach a final decision.
Section 21 of the FOIA provides that information is exempt where it is accessible by other means. Some of the information that is disclosable falling within the scope of your request can be found published on our website, here: [BetIndex Report](opens in new tab).
We can confirm that the Commission holds other information falling within the scope of your request. This information is however exempt from disclosure under sections 31 (law enforcement), 36 (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs), 42 (legal professional privilege) and/or 43 (commercial interests) of the FOIA.
Section 31 (Law Enforcement)
Section 31 of the FOIA provides that information held by a public authority is exempt if its disclosure would or would be likely to prejudice a public authority in the exercising of its functions for specified purposes, including:
(a) the purpose of ascertaining whether any person has failed to comply with the law,
(b) the purpose of ascertaining whether any person is responsible for any conduct which is improper,
(c) the purpose of ascertaining whether circumstances which would justify regulatory action in pursuance of any enactment exist or may arise.
Section 31(1)(g) of FOIA provides that information which is not exempt information by virtue of section 30 (which relates to investigations and proceedings) is exempt information if its disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice the exercise by any public authority of its functions for any of those purposes.
Section 36 (Prejudice to the Effective Conduct of Public Affairs)
Section 36 of the FOIA exempts information if, in the reasonable opinion of a “qualified person,” disclosure would — or would be likely to — prejudice the effective conduct of public affairs, including inhibiting free and frank advice or deliberation.
It is the qualified person’s view that the information falling within the scope of your request is exempt because it is information the disclosure of which would or would be likely to prejudice the collective responsibility of Ministers of the Crown (s36(2)(a)(i); would, or would be likely to, inhibit the free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation (s36(2)(b)(i) and (ii)) and/or would otherwise prejudice, or would be likely otherwise to prejudice, the effective conduct of public affairs (s36(2)(c).)
The view of the qualified person is that disclosure would be likely to inhibit the ability of Commission officials and others in expressing views and deliberating issues, which would in turn impair the quality of decision making and the provision of advice to government, and so is exempt from disclosure under s36(2)(b)(i) and (ii) and (c).
Section 42 (Legal Professional Privilege)
Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege (LPP) or, in Scotland, to confidentiality of communications could be maintained in legal proceedings is exempt information pursuant to s42 of the FOIA.
LPP recognises the confidentiality of communications between a legal advisor and a client enabling legal advice to be sought and received without fear of those communications being held against them in proceedings or otherwise. LPP applies to information falling within the scope of your request being communications provided for the dominant purpose of securing legal advice.
Section 43(2) (Commercial Interests)
Section 43(2) of the FOIA exempts information that would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of any person (including the public authority holding it). Information within the scope of your request identifies individual companies and is commercially sensitive.
The Public Interest Test
Each of the above exemptions is qualified and requires a public authority to balance the public interest in coming to a decision. The Commission has considered the public interest in disclosure of the information and the public interest in withholding the information and maintaining the exemptions detailed above.
In considering the public interest the Commission has considered factors in favour of disclosure of the information.
The Commission is a public body which regulates the gambling industry in accordance with its statutory objectives, and its work is in the public interest. We recognise that there is therefore a public interest in members of the public having confidence that the Commission is being open and honest in how it regulates, and the information it holds so that it can be effectively held to account. We also recognise the public interest in general relating to sports spread betting.
Weighed against these factors, the Commission has also considered factors in favour of maintaining the exemptions.
Disclosure of the material falling within the scope of your request would be likely to inhibit the free and frank communication between Commission officials and third parties, such as the FCA. There is a need for a safe space for Commission officials to have free and frank exchanges with the other regulators, and government and the disclosure of information is likely to have a chilling effect on the ability of officials to interact effectively in future and inhibit the giving and receiving of effective advice. It is not in the public interest to curtail the ability of the Commission to undertake free and frank communications and provide and receive advice as may be necessary in the development of policies for the public good.
Matters in relation to regulatory and public policy remain live and the disclosure would negatively impact the ability of Commission, Ministers and other regulators to exchange informal views and advice and reach decisions, free from external interference and distraction. Premature publication of these discussions could lead to an incomplete and confusing picture emerging and would be likely to prejudice the ability to reach and maintain collective agreement. Disclosure would create the risk of public discourse and prejudice the collective responsibility by exposing aspects of the policy development process prematurely. This could damage our stakeholders' and the Commission’s reputation and undermine its work.
In relation to legal advice, there is a strong public interest in the Commission being able to access full and frank legal advice without concerns that this advice will be disclosed. There is a strong public interest in the managed sharing of privileged legal advice “common interest privilege” to allow frank and open discussion between identified parties. Disclosure may have a chilling effect on the ability of officials to seek and receive legal advice when required which would not be in the public interest.
Where businesses have interacted with the regulator in a specific context there is a reasonable expectation that their commercial information would not be disclosed as a matter of course. Information relating to commercial activity is market sensitive. Details of individual companies not directly associated with the gambling industry does not contribute to supporting consumers with their choice of operator in the regulated gambling industry and does not further the public interest in that regard.
Having weighed these issues, the Commission is of the view that the public interest lies in favour of maintaining the exemptions and withholding the information.
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 new tab), Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.
Information Management Team
Gambling Commission