Clause 75

This section applies where —

an appeal has been made under section 165(10); or

an application under section 166(1) has been made (and in the case of an application by the respondent, permitted to be made under section 166(2)).(2) The Council may, instead of confirming, varying or revoking any order or visit limit —

substitute a family exclusion order with a family visit limit, if the Council is satisfied that the requirements in subsection (3)(a) are met;

substitute a family visit limit with a family exclusion order, if the Council is satisfied that the requirements in subsection (3)(b) are met;

substitute a third party exclusion order with a third party visit limit, if the Council is satisfied that the requirements in subsection (3)(c) are met; or

substitute a third party visit limit with a third party exclusion order, if the Council is satisfied that the requirements in subsection (3)(c) are met.(3) In substituting any exclusion order or visit limit under subsection (2) against a respondent, the Council must be satisfied that —

in the case of the substitution of a family exclusion order with a family visit limit —

the requirements in section 163A(4)(a) to (d) are met; and

it is more appropriate to impose a family visit limit instead of a family exclusion order;

in the case of the substitution of a family visit limit with a family exclusion order —

the requirements in section 162(1)(a) to (d) are met; and

it is more appropriate to impose a family exclusion order instead of a family visit limit;

in the case of the substitution of a third party exclusion order with a third party visit limit, or a third party visit limit with a third party exclusion order —

the respondent has a poor credit record or is vulnerable to financial harm because of his or her gambling (as mentioned respectively in section 165(1)(a) and (b));

it is more appropriate to impose a third party visit limit instead of a third party exclusion order, or a third party exclusion order instead of a third party visit limit, as the case may be; and

it is in the best interests of the respondent and his or her family members to make the substitution.(4) For the purposes of subsection (3)(b)(i), the Council may decide that there is a reasonable apprehension that the respondent may cause serious harm to family members because of his or her gambling (as mentioned in section 162(1)(a)), if the Council is satisfied that —

the respondent has caused such harm prior to the application mentioned in section 166(1), according to the test set out in section 162(2); and

there is reason to believe that the respondent’s irresponsible gambling behaviour will continue or recur.(5) For the purposes of determining whether a respondent is vulnerable to financial harm because of his or her gambling under subsection (3)(c)(i), the Council may have regard, but not be limited, to all or any of the matters in section 165(2)(a), (b) and (c).(6) For the purposes of subsection (3)(a)(i) and (b)(i), the Council may, in determining whether the requirements in sections 163A(4)(a) and 162(1)(a), respectively, are met, take into account events that have taken place outside Singapore.(7) If a respondent consents to the making of a family visit limit or a family exclusion order under subsection (2)(a) or (b), respectively, the Council may make the family visit limit or family exclusion order without receiving any further submission or evidence as to the grounds, even if the respondent disputes some or all of the grounds on which the family visit limit or family exclusion order is made.(8) A family exclusion order or a third party exclusion order made under subsection (2)(b) or (d), respectively, may do one or more of the following:

refer the respondent to participate in a programme of counselling, rehabilitation or special education or any combination of these;

ban the respondent from —

entering or remaining on all casino premises; or

taking part in any casino gambling or promotional game on all casino premises;

require the respondent to close any deposit account in a casino;

require a casino operator to close any deposit account of the respondent with the casino;

ban the respondent from —

entering or remaining in all gaming machine rooms except to perform defined work within any of those rooms; or

taking part in any playing of a gaming machine in all gaming machine rooms;

ban the respondent from engaging in all manner of general remote gambling;

impose all bans and requirements in paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f) or any combination thereof.(9) A family exclusion order made under subsection (2)(b) must specify the period during which it is in force, and may apply for the benefit of all of the respondent’s family members or specified family members (as mentioned respectively in section 163(1)(a) and (b)).(10) A third party exclusion order made under subsection (2)(d) may do one or more things mentioned in subsection (8) for as long as the respondent has a poor credit record or is vulnerable to financial harm because of his or her gambling (as mentioned respectively in section 165(1)(a) and (b)), or for such other period as may be specified in the order.(11) A family visit limit or a third party visit limit made under subsection (2)(a) or (c) respectively against a respondent must —

specify the period during which it is in force; and

specify the maximum number of visits in aggregate that the respondent may make to any casino in each month.(12) In making a family visit limit or a third party visit limit under subsection (2)(a) or (c) respectively against a respondent, the Council may also refer the respondent to participate in a programme of counselling, rehabilitation or special education or any combination of these.(13) The Council may, at any time, revoke a third party visit limit or a third party exclusion order made under subsection (2)(c) or (d) against a person if, having regard to all the circumstances of the case, the Council is of the opinion that the third party visit limit or third party exclusion order (as the case may be) would no longer be in the best interests of the person and his or her family members.(14) To avoid doubt, section 165(10) does not apply to any third party visit limits or third party exclusion orders made under subsection (2)(c) or (d) respectively.”.