If your business deals with customers online – or has extensive terms and rules – this one’s for you.
Many businesses spend significant time drafting their terms and conditions, but far less time thinking about how those terms are presented to customers. The unlikely courtroom victory in Durber v PPB Entertainment Ltd [2025] EWHC 498 (KB) serves as a helpful reminder that even well-drafted legal terms can be rendered ineffective if not clearly communicated or properly and fairly incorporated into a contract.
Wheel of misfortune
Corrine Durber played a slot game on the PaddyPower website and was shown an on-screen ‘wheel of fortune’ animation indicating she had won nearly £1.1 million. The company, PPB Entertainment Ltd, claimed that this was a software error and that she was actually only entitled to around £20,000, based on the outcome recorded by its backend system.
PPB sought to rely on standard terms and conditions that stated the server outcome was definitive in the event of a discrepancy. They also pointed to an exclusion clause that denied liability for system errors.
The wheel of fortune turns…
The High Court disagreed with the company, finding that Ms Durber was entitled to the prize as shown on screen.
The game rules, visible to the customer, stated that what was displayed on the player’s screen determined the outcome. The court found this to be clear and unambiguous. It held that where there is inconsistency between the game’s promotional rules and the pre-existing terms and conditions, the game’s rules may prevail – particularly if they are more visible to the consumer.
The court ruled that the exclusion clause was unusual and onerous and, as such, required special notice for it to be valid. Simply including it in the terms and conditions was not sufficient . Even if the clause had been incorporated, it would likely have failed under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. It created a significant imbalance between the parties and would not be considered fair in a consumer contract context.
Implications for SMEs
This case is not just relevant to gambling operators. It serves as a useful reminder that your contracts must be clearly presented to customers and employees to be enforceable. When setting up your online terms and conditions, you should keep in mind the following points:
i. Ambiguity is interpreted against the business
Courts will interpret unclear or conflicting terms in a way that favours the consumer. This is particularly important in standard-form contracts where consumers have no opportunity to negotiate.
ii. Visibility and fair notice are crucial
Important or unusual clauses – especially those that limit liability, impose penalties or restrict consumer rights – must be clearly brought to the user’s attention. This might involve using bold text or separate headings, or requiring users to actively acknowledge them (eg. by ticking a checkbox).
iii. Contracts must align with user experience
There must be consistency between what a customer sees (eg in-app messages, confirmation screens, gameplay outcomes) and what the contract says. If the user interface tells one story and the terms tell another, courts are likely to side with the consumer.
Remember: reviewing terms is a compliance must!
You should regularly review your terms and conditions to ensure that not only the language is clear but also that the terms and conditions are fairly presented. Contract enforceability depends not just on having the right wording, but on how and when those words are shared with the consumer.
Courts are increasingly focused on fairness and transparency: now is a good time to review your standard terms and contracts to ensure that they are fit for purpose for your business. Have a look at our example terms and conditions document for a robust and reliable template for your business. Our starting an online business toolkit includes the terms and conditions as well as website terms of use, checklists and other template documents you might need.
The content in this article is up to date at the date of publishing. The information provided is intended only for information purposes, and is not for the purpose of providing legal advice. Sparqa Legal’s Terms of Use apply.
Rahul joined Sparqa in 2025 from the Commercial Court, where he served as a Judicial Assistant. He has active interests in commercial, corporate and employment developments which he pursues alongside teaching undergraduate law.