Privacy vs Public Duty, Ex‑Entain Execs Hit Back at UKGC After 888 Fallout

_{Royal Courts of Justice. (Image: Justin Bell/Alamy)}

Two former executives of gambling firm Entain, Kenny Alexander and Lee Feldman, have launched a lawsuit against the UK Gambling Commission (UKGC), accusing the regulator of unlawfully breaching their privacy after their failed attempt to take control of 888 Holdings. The civil case comes as both men face criminal charges linked to alleged misconduct at Entain’s former Turkish operations.  

The 888 Takeover Attempt and Regulatory Intervention

In June 2023, Alexander and Feldman, via their investment vehicle FS Gaming, acquired a 6.5% stake in 888 and sought top executive roles at the company.  

Within weeks, the UKGC opened a licence‑review into 888, citing concerns over the men’s past involvement with Entain amid an ongoing investigation by HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) into alleged bribery and corruption in Entain’s Turkish business, associated with a probe code‑named “Operation Incendiary.”  

In July 2023, 888 withdrew from takeover talks, telling investors it could not secure what it described as “the most basic assurances” about regulatory risks related to Alexander and Feldman.  

The Lawsuit: Privacy Breach or Regulatory Duty?

Alexander and Feldman argue the UKGC improperly disclosed private information when it publicly declared the licence review and later confirmed its closure. They claim those disclosures gave the false impression of guilt and caused reputational damage, lost opportunities, and personal distress.  

According to their legal filings, the regulator’s “very considerable collaboration” on 888’s public announcements constituted a misuse of private information or breach of confidence. The former executives say they were not given a chance to respond before 888’s announcement.  

The UKGC contends its actions were justified. In court filings, the regulator argues it was fulfilling statutory obligations and protecting licence integrity. It denies improperly disclosing private facts, asserting that all statements were made in the public interest.  

The Criminal Backdrop

In August 2025, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) announced charges against 11 individuals, including Alexander and Feldman, alleging conspiracy to defraud and conspiracy to bribe in connection with Entain’s former Turkish operations between 2011 and 2018.  

Under UK law, those offences carry maximum sentences of up to 10 years in prison and/or unlimited fines.  

The first public hearing in the criminal case was held in November 2025 at Southwark Crown Court. Meanwhile, the civil lawsuit against the UKGC remains active, with a High Court hearing date yet to be confirmed.  

What’s at Stake, and Who Should Pay Attention

For Alexander and Feldman, the civil action is a bid to reclaim their reputations and challenge what they regard as premature public exposure of allegations before they have been adjudicated in a criminal court. For them, the stakes include professional standing, future employment prospects, and the public image of their families.  

For regulators, and future M&A activity in the gambling sector, the case could set important boundaries around when and how early-stage regulatory reviews are made public. The outcome could reshape disclosure practices for high‑risk deals, especially when criminal probes loom.

For the public and investors, the lawsuit shines a light on the tension between safeguarding individuals’ privacy and ensuring transparency where public‑interest and consumer protection are concerned.