Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Bodog provided unlicensed gambling services in Manitoba, violating sections 202 and 206 of the Criminal Code.

• False and misleading advertising claims contravened section 52(1) of the Competition Act and section 7(d) of the Trademarks Act.

• MBLL proved economic harm through revenue diversion and brand dilution caused by Bodog’s illegal operations.

• The court accepted uncontested evidence as the respondents failed to appear, respond, or file any materials.

• Declaratory and injunctive relief was supported by statutory authority and longstanding legal precedent.

• A permanent injunction was granted to block Bodog’s access and advertising in Manitoba and require geo-blocking.

Background and parties involved

Manitoba Liquor and Lotteries Corporation (MBLL) sought and obtained a court order prohibiting Il Nido Ltd. and Sanctum IP Holdings Ltd. from offering, advertising, or operating online gambling services in Manitoba via the websites bodog.eu, bodog.net, or any successor domains. MBLL, the province’s exclusive legal operator of gambling services under subsection 207(1)(a) of the Criminal Code, The Manitoba Liquor and Lotteries Corporation Act (C.C.S.M. c. L155), and The Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Act (C.C.S.M. c. L153), operates legal gambling through playnow.com/mb.

The respondents were duly served but failed to appear or file any response. As such, the court’s findings were based solely on the uncontested evidence provided by MBLL.

Nature of Bodog's activities and legal violations

Il Nido Ltd., incorporated in Antigua and Barbuda, operates the Bodog platform, which includes bodog.eu (a real-money gambling site) and bodog.net (a free-play site), both accessible to Manitoba residents. Sanctum IP Holdings Ltd. is the registrant of a Canadian trademark for Bodog. Although Bodog blocks access to bodog.com for Manitobans via geo-blocking, no such restriction is in place for bodog.eu or bodog.net.

Bodog promotes itself as a legal, safe, and trusted gambling platform for Canadians, with claims such as being “a legal online casino in Canada” and “the most trusted site in Canada.” These claims were found to be materially false and misleading. Bodog does not hold any license from MBLL, the Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Authority of Manitoba (LGCA), or any Canadian authority.

Relevant legal framework and policy terms

Sections 202 and 206 of the Criminal Code prohibit gambling unless authorized under section 207, which applies only to licensed provincial authorities. MBLL’s exclusive authority is derived from this provision. The court held that Bodog's activities—offering online gambling and advertising to Manitobans—were unlawful and did not fall under any exceptions.

The Competition Act (section 52(1)) prohibits materially false or misleading representations to the public, while the Trademarks Act (section 7(d)) prohibits misleading descriptions of services. The court found that Bodog’s claims about legality and safety violated both statutes, misleading the public and harming MBLL’s reputation and trademark goodwill.

Court’s findings and declarations

Justice Harris declared that:

• Bodog had no lawful authority to operate or advertise online gambling services in Manitoba.

• Bodog’s advertising constituted false representations under section 52(1) of the Competition Act and misleading descriptions under section 7(d) of the Trademarks Act.

• Bodog committed the unlawful means tort by knowingly inflicting economic harm on MBLL through illegal conduct in the province.

MBLL demonstrated that Manitobans were able to access Bodog's real-money site, register with a Manitoba address, and place bets in Canadian dollars, including on Winnipeg-based sports teams.

Injunctive relief and final orders

The court granted a permanent injunction ordering Bodog and its affiliates to:

• Cease operating bodog.eu in a manner accessible to Manitoba residents.

• Stop all advertising, paid or unpaid, targeting or accessible to people in Manitoba across all media, including social media, TV, radio, and websites.

• Refrain from authorizing others to conduct these activities.

• Implement geo-blocking technology on bodog.eu to prevent access by anyone in Manitoba.

Justice Harris found MBLL’s legal rights clearly established and that damages would be inadequate due to the ongoing and unquantifiable harm caused by Bodog’s operations. Bodog’s offshore location and failure to engage in the proceeding further supported the need for injunctive relief. The court awarded costs to MBLL.

Conclusion

The case confirms that online gambling services accessible to Manitobans must be licensed under Canadian law and that foreign operators cannot avoid compliance through offshore incorporation. Misleading representations about legality and safety will be subject to enforcement under federal statutes, and courts will grant robust remedies—including injunctive relief—when faced with uncontested, ongoing harm to provincial authorities like MBLL.

No monetary damages were awarded in this case.