The Gaming Act 1710 (9 Ann. c. 19) was an act of the Parliament of Great Britain.
Subsequent developments The act was largely superseded by the Gaming Act 1968.
Section 1 of the act ceased to have effect by virtue of section 334(1)(a) of the Gambling Act 2005.
The whole act was repealed by sections 356(3)(a) and (4) of, and schedule 17 to, the Gambling Act 2005.
United States
District of Columbia In the District of Columbia, a version of the Act (commonly referred to as the 'Statute of Anne') remained part of the D.C. Code.
Under the modern D.C. version of the law, a gambler who loses more than $25 may sue within three months to recover losses. If the gambler does not sue within that period, another person may bring an action to recover treble damages, with half of any recovery payable to the District of Columbia.
The statute drew renewed public attention in 2025 after a Delaware-based entity, DC Gambling Recovery LLC, filed federal lawsuits against several major sports betting operators, including DraftKings, BetMGM, and Caesars Sportsbook. The lawsuits argued that despite the legalization of sports betting in the District in 2018, the Statute of Anne’s recovery provisions remained in force. In response, the D.C. Council passed legislation clarifying that the Statute of Anne did not apply to legalized sports wagering in the District.
U.S. States Similar lawsuits based on the same Statute of Anne theory have also been recently brought against prediction market and gambling operators in several U.S. states, including Ohio, Kentucky, Illinois, South Carolina, Massachusetts, and Georgia.
See also History of gambling in the United Kingdom
Notes
References Halsbury's Statutes,
External links