Ebet and Btobet launch legal challenges against Aspire Global

Ebet’s legal challenge was filed in the Eighth District Court of Clark County, Nevada, while Btobet’s was filed in the Business and Property Courts of England and Wales.

Aspire Global was acquired by NeoGames in 2022. The deal closed in June of that year.

Ebet’s legal challenge stems from its deal to acquire certain B2C assets from Aspire Global in May 2021. According to the documentation, this was to include websites, domains and intellectual property. Aspire also set up a special purpose entity called Karamba Limited for this purpose.

The legal challenge states that Ebet “relied on representations” from Aspire Global for aspects of the deal. Ebet alleges these were presented fraudulently.

“False representations”

Ebet is claiming that Aspire and associated companies “made false representations” in terms of the number of player accounts belonging to Aspire.

These alleged falsities also include expenses and revenues and Aspire’s process to acquire an online gaming licence in Germany.

In terms of the player accounts, Ebet is claiming that Aspire knowingly inflated these in order to get Ebet to agree to the deal.

Ebet also alleges that Aspire knew it would not qualify for an online gaming licence in Germany. This is because it supposedly missed a basic payment as part of the process.

The legal challenge also accuses Aspire Global of having “misrepresented their operating expenses in their audited carve-out financials to induce Ebet to believe it was purchasing a business of top-line annual revenue of approximately €65 million.”

Ebet is accusing Aspire of breaching representations and warranties in the share purchase agreement by providing Ebet with false information.

Btobet legal challenge

The legal challenge from Btobet lists co-founders Sousa Enterprises Ltd and Eltsar Ltd as claimants. It alleges that Aspire breached obligations within a special purchase agreement, which was dated September 2020. This is related to Aspire’s €20m acquisition of Btobet at the time.

The challenge mainly centres on clauses related to earnout. Sousa and Eltsar allege that Btobet incurred additional jurisdiction costs in 2022 and Aspire did not pay any additional fees as a result of this.

According to the legal challenge, these costs came from Btobet attempting to develop Aspire in different jurisdictions throughout 2022.