Advertisement
Australia markets closed
  • ALL ORDS

    7,897.50
    +48.10 (+0.61%)
     
  • ASX 200

    7,629.00
    +42.00 (+0.55%)
     
  • AUD/USD

    0.6612
    +0.0040 (+0.61%)
     
  • OIL

    77.99
    -0.96 (-1.22%)
     
  • GOLD

    2,310.10
    +0.50 (+0.02%)
     
  • Bitcoin AUD

    96,703.99
    +3,337.50 (+3.57%)
     
  • CMC Crypto 200

    1,359.39
    +82.41 (+6.45%)
     
  • AUD/EUR

    0.6140
    +0.0020 (+0.33%)
     
  • AUD/NZD

    1.0992
    -0.0017 (-0.16%)
     
  • NZX 50

    11,938.08
    +64.04 (+0.54%)
     
  • NASDAQ

    17,890.79
    +349.25 (+1.99%)
     
  • FTSE

    8,213.49
    +41.34 (+0.51%)
     
  • Dow Jones

    38,675.68
    +450.02 (+1.18%)
     
  • DAX

    18,001.60
    +105.10 (+0.59%)
     
  • Hang Seng

    18,475.92
    +268.79 (+1.48%)
     
  • NIKKEI 225

    38,236.07
    -37.98 (-0.10%)
     

Las Vegas Sands faces $12 billion lawsuit in Macau

American casino giant Las Vegas Sands is facing a $12 billion lawsuit in a Macau court.

Former partner Asian American Entertainment Corporation alleges that Sands breached their contract in order to obtain a casino license in Macau.

They're seeking damages worth some 70% of Sands' Macau profits from 2004 to 2022.

The case dates back to 2001, when Sands and Asian American jointly submitted a bid for a casino in the former Portuguese colony, the only legal gambling destination in China.

According to the lawsuit, Sands switched partners during the process, and teamed up with Hong Kong's Galaxy Entertainment group instead.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sands and Galaxy later went on to win the coveted casino license with a submission Asian American claims was nearly identical to the one they had drafted together.

The lawsuit comes as the casino titan faces plummeting revenue due to travel restrictions, and just a few months before its license in Macau expires.

Sands has been battling Asian American's claims since 2007, when the case was first launched in the United States.

The case there was dismissed for statute of limitations and procedural reasons and later lodged in Macau.

The company declined to comment, but has consistently maintained that the case has "no merit."

The trial is set to begin on June 16.