A New Jersey court has refused Evolution AB’s attempt to bring Playtech Plc into its ongoing defamation lawsuit, keeping the case focused on its original defendants while leaving several procedural questions unresolved. The decision comes amid a long-running dispute linked to a 2021 investigative report that triggered regulatory attention in multiple jurisdictions.
Court filings confirm that the request to amend the complaint and formally include Playtech was denied by the Atlantic County Superior Court. The motion formed part of a broader effort by Evolution to widen the scope of its claims after new information emerged during earlier proceedings.
Proceedings Keep Original Case Structure Intact
Evolution’s lawsuit initially targeted the New York-based law firm Calcagni & Kanefsky LLP, which had submitted the disputed report to regulators in New Jersey. The company later sought to expand the litigation after identifying Playtech as the alleged client behind the commissioning of private intelligence firm Black Cube, which prepared the report in question.
The rejected amendment would have added Playtech as a defendant alongside other proposed parties, including public relations consultant Juda Engelmayer. Evolution’s proposed claims covered defamation, trade libel, fraud, and racketeering, and were tied to allegations that Playtech financed and directed the investigative work.
According to Evolution, Playtech allegedly paid approximately $2.4 million to Black Cube to conduct the investigation and distribute findings that would later reach regulatory bodies. The company has argued that the report was intended to create reputational harm and trigger scrutiny of its operations across international markets.
In its earlier filings, Evolution stated:
“It continues to be disappointing that a direct competitor would go to such extreme lengths to orchestrate a covert campaign designed to harm our business and avoid competing fairly in the marketplace. We are formally naming Playtech in our lawsuit because the facts are clear: Playtech hired Black Cube to create and publicize a defamatory report designed to harm Evolution, all while misleading the market and lying to investors about its role. For nearly four years, Playtech spent millions of dollars in legal fees to conceal its involvement in this smear campaign and avoid accountability.”
Playtech has rejected these allegations, maintaining that its engagement with Black Cube was a legitimate investigative step intended to address industry-related concerns. The company continues to dispute claims that it participated in any coordinated effort targeting Evolution.
Legal Thresholds and Anti-SLAPP Considerations
The court’s refusal to allow Playtech’s addition at this stage is linked to procedural arguments connected to Black Cube’s motion under the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA), New Jersey’s anti-SLAPP statute. The ruling focused on procedural timing rather than a final judgment on the underlying allegations.
Legal observers note that the decision does not necessarily eliminate the possibility of Playtech being added later, depending on how related motions progress in the case.
The same judicial order also denied Evolution’s request for relief from UPEPA protections. As a result, a key hearing involving Evolution, Black Cube, and Calcagni & Kanefsky is scheduled for November 2026, where the disputed report and associated claims will be examined further.
Discovery Rulings and Court-Appointed Oversight
Judge John C. Porto addressed several discovery-related matters during the proceedings. The court granted Black Cube access to additional transcripts and recordings tied to communications with the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement (DGE). These materials relate directly to the regulator’s review of allegations contained in the 2021 report.
At the same time, the judge rejected broader requests for disclosure that extended beyond the DGE investigation, limiting access to materials connected to separate inquiries.
To manage remaining disputes, the court appointed retired U.S. District Judge Robert B. Kugler as a special adjudicator. He will oversee unresolved discovery issues, including internal review materials involving third-party assistance. His compensation was set at $900 per hour, with costs shared by the parties involved.
Regulatory Background and Continuing Dispute
The origins of the case trace back to a 2020 investigation reportedly commissioned by Playtech and carried out through Black Cube. The process involved interviews conducted under disputed circumstances, and the resulting report was later submitted to regulators in New Jersey and Pennsylvania in 2021.
The report alleged that Evolution had operated in jurisdictions including China, Iran, and Sudan. Both the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement and the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board subsequently launched reviews.
Neither authority pursued enforcement action against Evolution.
Court documents referencing the DGE findings stated that there was “no evidence … showing that Evolution took illegal bets from New Jersey, another state, or any other prohibited jurisdiction,” and “no evidence of inappropriate payments to Evolution by its clients or that Evolution provided devices for customers to illegally use their content.”
Later judicial references described the report as “objectively baseless” after considering the regulatory conclusions.
Despite the ongoing dispute, Playtech has continued expanding its North American footprint. Its iPoker network has recently launched through FanDuel, with availability across Michigan, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Ontario.
The litigation remains active, with further procedural rulings and discovery decisions expected before the matter proceeds toward trial preparation.
Source:
Judge Blocks Evolution Move to Expand NJ Defamation Case, news.worldcasinodirectory.com, June 17, 2026
