Swedish live-casino supplier Evolution AB has filed a request with the Superior Court of New Jersey to amend an ongoing defamation lawsuit to include rival gaming technology provider Playtech Plc and several associated individuals as defendants.
The move stems from allegations that Playtech orchestrated and funded a false and commercially motivated smear campaign intended to damage Evolution’s reputation and obstruct its entry into the North American online gaming market.
Five years on
Evolution originally initiated the defamation case against US law firm Calcagni & Kanefsky LLP and intelligence contractor Black Cube back in late 2020. Playtech allegedly engaged Black Cube to conduct an investigation into Evolution’s activities in prohibited and unlicensed markets.
The resulting report was later submitted to regulators in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, prompting scrutiny of Evolution’s operations.
However, both regulators ultimately found no evidence supporting the report’s core allegations. The New Jersey Superior Court later described the document as “objectively baseless.”
In a statement to iGB in October, Black Cube said it had “proudly submitted its findings in coordination with its client”.
Playtech also hit back at Evolution’s claims, stating the investigation was undertaken lawfully to understand and verify “concerns of significant regulatory and commercial importance”.
The proposed amendment, if allowed, will implicate Playtech and Juda Engelmayer, a communications professional affiliated with HeraldPR, as central players behind the commissioning of Black Cube to prepare the report.
The allegations broken down
In its amended filing, Evolution asserts several claims against Playtech and related parties. They alleged that Playtech hired Black Cube to investigate Evolution and generated a report alleging corporate misconduct. Evolution describes this as “preordained” and without evidentiary basis.
Evolution further claimed that Playtech purportedly agreed to pay substantial success fees, cited by Evolution as approximately £1.5 million. This was contingent upon Black Cube delivering results aligned with Playtech’s desired narrative. Playtech is also accused of hiding its involvement from both investors and regulators while investing millions in legal fees to obscure its role in the affair.
In addition, Evolution accused Juda Engelmayer and his firm HeraldPR of reportedly facilitating the leaking of the report to media outlets to maximise reputational damage.
Beyond defamation and trade libel, Evolution alleged fraud, racketeering and the withholding of material information from shareholders.
Evolution has also alleged that Black Cube used deceptive methods during its investigation. This includes covert recordings and the use of false identities when engaging with former employees. These contribute to what it characterises as a misleading and defamatory narrative.
Evolution’s filings also point to Playtech’s history of regulatory scrutiny in Sweden in 2025 for compliance issues.
Playtech’s response
Playtech has publicly dismissed Evolution’s proposed legal amendment as “baseless and without merit.” The London-listed competitor stated it expected Evolution’s move following the latter’s public comments in October 2025.
Playtech stands by the commissioning of the investigative report and its findings. They welcomed court and regulatory scrutiny whilst expressing confidence that discovery proceedings will validate the report’s credibility.
Furthermore, Playtech countered with its own accusations. They suggest Evolution aims to “avoid legitimate scrutiny” regarding allegations of supplying operators in illegal or unsanctioned markets and supporting unlicensed operators within regulated jurisdictions.
Playtech has framed the investigation as a lawful response to “credible and repeated concerns” raised by operators, suppliers, and regulators about Evolution’s activities.
Industry impact
The dispute highlights ongoing tensions in the online gaming sector, particularly between two of the largest B2B suppliers globally.
The controversy intersected with broader regulatory scrutiny. In the UK, the Gambling Commission launched a review of Evolution’s supplier licence in 2024 over concerns its games were accessible via unlicensed operators. It prompted the company to withdraw from certain grey markets and strengthen compliance controls, albeit at a financial cost.
The prolonged legal battle has also weighed on investor sentiment.
The immediate market impact in October 2025 was felt by Playtech as its share price plummeted between 25% and 38%. Evolution’s share price, by contrast, held steady or even rose slightly upon the release of its statement.
But with this most recent development, the case could impact share prices for both Evolution and Playtech. Back in November, Ben Robinson, managing partner at Corfai Capital told iGB that “from a share value perspective, both sides appear to have little to gain from letting this escalate.”
The complexity of aggregator networks and VPN usage makes tackling the prevention of unregulated jurisdictions a hugely complex task.
“Content from major suppliers, including both Evolution and Playtech, often appears through third-party aggregators. That doesn’t prove direct involvement; it reflects the increasingly fragmented nature of distribution,” he adds.
The Superior Court of New Jersey will now decide whether to allow the amended complaint to proceed.
Kathryn Evans
Kathryn covers bitesize breaking news with a primary focus on EMEA and US legislation. A proud North Walian, fluent Welsh speaker and lifelong Wrexham FC fan – long before Hollywood came calling.
Original article: https://igamingbusiness.com/legal-compliance/legal/evolution-seeks-to-add-playtech-to-new-jersey-defamation-suit/
