Given that not all cases are successful, is it not possible that pursuing the matter through the courts could be considered... a bit of a gamble? And that by even allowing his case to proceed, high court judges are themselves complicit in feeding his addiction?
Also, whatever his 'savings' are, they can't be too much if he is a gambling addict, for surely he would have blown every last penny he could lay his hands on. Even if they are as high as £10,000, a potential £2.1m win equates to paid out odds of (roughly) 210/1, far better than the national lottery and significantly more worthwhile than trap six at Walthamstow.

Chris, Worthing, England

Unfortunately, we seem to be moving towards a 'blame' culture similar to America where you can't do anything without threat of a lawsuit of some sort. Surely, if the gentleman knew he was an 'adict' it was up to him to then go and get treatment, not up to the betting office to stop taking his bets?

It'll be interesting to see what happens to this one in Court - hopefully common sense will prevail.....

Emma, Birmingham, UK

We are in fact discussing moral agency, which cannot be switched on and off. We are moral agents when we vote, marry, have children and so on; we are also moral agents when we throw our money away betting.

Dectora, London, UK

I agree with the general gist, that is there is a sense that we are developing a victim culture whereby no one actually has to take responsibility for themselves anymore.

In the case of the gambling addict, he made use of a facility to block himself from making bets in order to restrict his compulsion.

This facility failed and he was able to continue gambling. He did make some effort to take responsibility and William Hill has profited from this failure. I think these facts throw the circumstances of this case in entirely different light.

L Aherne, Glasgow,

He is having a laugh I think. Has he not heard of 'assumption of risk' - A legal doctrine under which a person may not recover for an injury received when he has voluntarily exposed himself to a known danger'?Yes, he asked William Hill to bar him but neverthless gambling is gamblimg- you can win and you can lose and he lost. He should be a man and take responsibility for your own action, even his addictive actions. I hope the judge throws away the case. But then again, I am sure due to the PR he has generated, even if he loses in the UK, he will take to ECJ or some human rights outfit in Europe! Crazy. Whatever happens, I pray that legal aid is not given to him after he exhauts his own funds. That would be a true travasty if were given tax payer money to go to europe.

Abdul Salam, London, UK

I agree entirely. Hamad Lone - very funny!!! I'm sure you would find a lawyer too. It gets more and more absurd, doesn't it? I'm taking Hamad to court because he's made me laugh and now I'm addicted to laughing. Jane Cooper-Smith

jane, london, england

Why should he be compensated for his lack of will power? Maybe I should take fast food restaurants to court for making me fat - oh wait, someone has and failed becuse it is ludicrous!! I hope that he wastes his money - he is a fool, anyone who thinks that they are owed just because they could not be bothered to stop themselves deserves to have this country laughing at them!!

Its disgusting and outrageous!

S Bradu, Aberdeen,

Thank goodness for a right thinking article, can we have more from Carol Sarler.

It's about time someone started telling the truth about the many excuses people use to pass the buck for their own failings.

Pat Thornton, Veliko Tarnovo, Bulgaria

This type of case should never be brought to court. I am thinking of suing this newspaper because I've become a "have your say" junkie. I'm sure I'll find a lawyer to represent me.

Hamad Lone, London, England