About this app
About Sword Of Arthur
Bengtsson said the revenue gains from recent investment efforts should translate into improved operating leverage as the casino business continues to grow.
“The sustainability in the operational improvements and in our market share gains are clearly there,” he said. “Those are real, and they are happening right now.
“Our ambition, as we outlined in March, has always been to change the trajectory of our land-based business, which I think we now have done. Our ambition is now to continue to take market share in the land-based casinos.”
How to play Sword Of Arthur
Judge Kennedy explained in her ruling, “The court finds that Hasselback’s statements that continued representation in this matter would cause him to violate several ethical obligations trigger mandatory withdrawal under Model Rule 1.16(a) and is sufficient for granting his motion.” She added, “Hasselback need not be required to provide details, beyond his written motion, to establish that mandatory withdrawal is warranted,” and stated that requiring him “to specify the basis for his mandatory withdrawal could create the untenable situation of an attorney having to choose between his obligation of candor to the court and his obligation to maintain his client’s confidences.”
Unfortunately, because of that attorney-client privilege, it is difficult to know what types of ethical dilemmas Hasselback is facing. However, it’s likely just the mere hint at issues will be enough for IPI to find itself, once again, being more closely scrutinized. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, given gaming regulators’ reluctance to hold the company accountable for its actions.
IPI now has until this Friday to find a new lawyer to carry the six-case workload Hasselback had, but will most likely use this as an excuse to delay the ongoing legal battles. It won’t get very far with that, though, and perhaps Judge Kennedy expected IPI to try something. She added in her ruling that the attorney’s exit “may cause some delay, [but] that delay is not so much so that it would cause significant prejudice or adversely and materially affect the plaintiff.”
About Sword Of Arthur
In an April interview with iGB, Sher reflected on the challenges of regulatory uncertainty in Mexico
“Right now we are working based on a framework of laws which you cannot even call regulation, from 1947,” Sher said. “So it’s very hard to work long-term and to give long-term commitments. While the future is unclear in terms of regulation, we saw what happened in other countries in LatAm when they changed the regulation every other month.
“In Mexico, I think we are stable, we know how to deal with this market. Of course, we will be very happy if in the future, a proper regulatory framework will be introduced and not the way that we are working right now.”
