Victoria Supreme Court sets legal costs at 33 percent in group proceeding against betting service

Plaintiff filed suit on behalf of those who placed bets via website and app

Victoria Supreme Court sets legal costs at 33 percent in group proceeding against betting service
Supreme Court of Victoria

In a group proceeding against Entain Group Pty Limited under Part 4A of the Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic), the Supreme Court of Victoria fixed legal costs at 33 percent of any award or settlement that the group might recover. 

The plaintiff initiated the case of Bergman v Entain Group Pty Limited (GCO Ruling) [2026] VSC 458 on behalf of individuals who placed bets with Entain via the company’s website and smartphone app. 

The plaintiff alleged that s 5(1) of the Interactive Gambling Act 2001 (Cth) prohibited the “in‑play” betting service, known as a “Fast Code Service,” which Entain used in these activities. 

The plaintiff pursued relief in contract, under the Australian Consumer Law, and under equitable principles of restitution. 

Request for group costs

The plaintiff sought a group costs order (GCO) under s 33ZDA of the Supreme Court Act. Specifically, the plaintiff wanted:

  • the plaintiff’s and the group members’ payment of legal costs to Maurice Blackburn, solicitors for the plaintiffs and group members, under s 33ZDA(1) 
  • Maurice Blackburn’s payment of the defendant’s costs of the proceeding and security of costs, if any, under 33ZDA(2) 

The plaintiff asked the court to set legal costs at 35 percent of any recovery in the group proceeding. 

Group costs order

The Victorian Supreme Court issued a GCO for the plaintiff’s legal costs in this proceeding, with the rate fixed at 33 percent. 

The court explained that granting a GCO with a fixed rate would: 

  • Permit the funding of the proceeding, with significant and real structural safeguards and benefits for group members 
  • Ensure that the plaintiff and the group members would get a fixed and certain proportion of any award or settlement 
  • Prevent legal costs from disproportionately eroding any returns to group members 
  • Set aside around two-thirds of any award for group members 
  • Protect the plaintiff from the risk of adverse costs 
  • Serve as a suitable or fitting way of ensuring that the proceeding would achieve justice in the context of s 33ZDA of the Supreme Court Act 

Victoria Supreme Court’s findings

The Supreme Court of Victoria described the GCO’s proposed structure as simple and readily understandable. 

Given the risk‑related considerations, the court fixed a percentage higher than the mean, by reference to GCOs issued in prior cases. The court refused to set a higher rate than what it previously ordered in Bergman v Sportsbet Pty Ltd (GCO Ruling) [2025] VSC 521. 

The court pointed out that it could later review the rate it fixed under s 33ZDA(3) of the Supreme Court Act to ultimately ensure a reasonable and proportionate cost award. 

Enjoy this story? Read the latest corporate and M&A law news on the main page!