The appellant casino appealed a Small Claims Court decision awarding the respondent players a 1000:1 payout for a Pai Gow Poker hand.
The dispute centered on whether the payout was governed by the legend printed on the gaming table or the casino's internal rules approved by the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the casino created an ambiguity by posting a legend that differed from its approved rules without notifying players that other rules applied.
The court held that the players reasonably relied on the table legend, which formed the contract.
