Small casino operators have failed in their High Court challenge against plans for 17 controversial new regional casinos to be build across Britain.
The government had said the challenge was without merit and Mr Justice Langstaff today ruled against the challenge on all counts.
May's High Court hearing was aimed at establishing whether the act discriminates against existing operators, who are allowed far fewer gambling machines than the 17 new venues will have.
Included in the proposals is the controversial plan to erect a Super-Casino in Manchester - something that has outraged anti-gambling campaigners, who say that it will trigger an increase in alcohol and gambling problems.
The plans have come about to take advantage of The Gambling Act, which comes into effect in September, and will deregulate the casino industry.
The government has taken a divisive stance on the matter, saying it will go ahead with its policies, even though Peers rejected the casino plans earlier in the year.
The locations chosen to have the new larger regional casino are Leeds, Hull, Great Yarmouth, Middlesbrough, Milton Keynes, Southampton, Solihull and Newham, in London.
Smaller casinos are proposed for Bath and North East Somerset, Dumfries and Galloway, East Lindsey, Luton, Scarborough, Swansea, Torbay and Wolverhampton.
The Evangelical Alliance has said it strongly condemns proposals to use casinos for regeneration as ineffective and unethical.
