1. What is the current legal landscape for gambling law in Canada?

Canadian gambling law is built on federal criminal-law restrictions and provincial implementation. Under the federal Criminal Code, various forms of gaming, betting and lottery activity are prohibited unless authorized by an applicable statutory exception. Section 207(1)(a), for example, permits a provincial government to conduct and manage a lottery scheme in the province in accordance with provincial law. Each province therefore determines whether, and how, online gaming is made available within the federal framework. The result is a patchwork rather than a national market.

Ontario opened the first competitive online market on April 4, 2022. Private operators register with the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (the “AGCO”), the regulator, and sign operating agreements with iGaming Ontario (“iGO”), the provincial entity that conducts and manages the activity for the purposes of the Criminal Code. In January 2026, Ontario had 48 registered operators running 82 gaming sites.

Alberta became the second open market. Under the iGaming Alberta Act, the Alberta iGaming Corporation (the “AiGC”) conducts and manages the market and enters into commercial agreements with operators, while Alberta Gaming, Liquor and Cannabis (“AGLC”) registers operators and regulates the market. The market opened on July 13, 2026, with 22 operator sites live on the first day. Registered operators that were not ready on that day have until October 13, 2026, to complete their transition.

Outside Ontario and Alberta, a provincial lottery corporation or other provincially authorized entity is generally the only lawful online gambling provider, although unregulated operators serve many residents regardless. This is commonly called the grey market. Estimates of its size differ by source and by what is measured, so they should be read with care. In Ontario, an Ipsos survey commissioned by the AGCO and iGO in spring 2026 found that 91.1% of Ontarians who gambled online in the previous three months had wagered on a regulated site, up from 83.7% in 2025. Outside Ontario, estimates of the unregulated market are considerably higher. Blask, an industry analytics firm, estimates that offshore operators accounted for approximately 89% of Alberta’s online market before it opened on July 13, 2026, and 65% of British Columbia’s, based on its Competitive Earning Baseline model for the 12 months to June 2026. These are modelled estimates, rather than direct measurements of wagers or player spending. British Columbia’s Minister of Finance has separately estimated that BCLC captures approximately 51% of the province’s online gambling market. British Columbia also moved its regulator to the Independent Gambling Control Office (IGCO) when the Gaming Control Act came into force on April 13, 2026.

Attention is now turning to which province may open next, and Québec was the most closely watched during the 2026 election campaign. During the campaign for the October 5, 2026, election, Québec Liberal Party leader Charles Milliard proposed giving the Régie des alcools, des courses et des jeux responsibility for licensing and overseeing online gaming, while Parti Québécois leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon expressed support for regulating private online gaming. The Parti Québécois won the election and will form a minority government, with 59 of 127 seats. No bill has yet been introduced.

2. What three essential pieces of advice would you give to clients involved in gambling law matters?

Given the current iGaming landscape in Canada, we would offer the following three pieces of advice.

1. Understand how the law is actually enforced, not only what it says. The statutes are the starting point, but regulators and governments decide where to focus. Advertising is a good example: Ontario has detailed restrictions on inducements and advertising, but questions such as whether particular content is misleading, excessively promotes gambling or improperly targets consumers can require a contextual assessment. By contrast, requirements such as registration, reporting and technical controls tend to operate as more straightforward compliance obligations. For a prospective operator, understanding that difference matters: it helps distinguish rules that require strict operational compliance from areas where regulatory interpretation and enforcement practice are likely to affect how the business can operate.
2. Focus on good customer service and avoid complaints. Player complaints can reach regulators directly. In Alberta, the AiGC is responsible for public complaints, and in Ontario the AGCO accepts internet gaming complaints from the public. A dispute about a payout, a bonus term or a self-exclusion failure can therefore become a regulatory issue. Operators may find it useful to resolve complaints at first contact and in writing, and to maintain effective systems for handling player complaints, self-exclusion requests and other player-protection issues. A strong complaint-handling process can help resolve problems before they escalate and gives the operator a clear record of how it responded.
3. Keep watching for changes in the law and in enforcement, because both keep moving. Within the few weeks previous to the writing of this article, for instance, Alberta’s transition closed, 2026, the Supreme Court of Canada heard a case on whether Ontario may pool certain player-versus-player games with other jurisdictions (with a decision pending), and a new Québec government was elected, with potential significant ramifications for the regulation of gaming in that province. Operators may wish to ask a compliance lead or counsel to review each registered regulator’s published notices at regular intervals, so that changes to standards or guidance are identified before they apply.

3. What are the greatest threats and opportunities in gambling law in the next 12 months?

For lawyers, the greatest threat and the greatest opportunity may be the same thing: artificial intelligence (“AI”). The threat is that AI tools may displace a significant share of routine legal work, such as first drafts, document review and basic research, and clients may come to expect that work to be faster and cheaper. Furthermore, clients may use AI and push back against legal advice. The opportunity is that lawyers who use these tools well may research more quickly, spend more time on judgment and strategy, and give clients more cohesive advice. The firms that gain from AI are likely to be those that treat its output as a first draft that a lawyer must check.

For clients, two main events may provide opportunities in gambling law. The first is the Supreme Court of Canada’s consideration of whether Ontario may pool liquidity in player-versus-player games, such as online poker, to players in other jurisdictions. Alberta has intervened because the outcome could affect its own market, and a decision may determine whether the two provinces can pool players. The second is the possible opening of Québec to private operators, which could create a third regulated market if a framework is passed, as discussed above. For operators and suppliers, both developments could expand the addressable market, create opportunities to enter new jurisdictions or offer new products, and increase the potential value of existing Canadian operations.

4. How do you ensure high client satisfaction levels are maintained by your practice?

Gaming law is an area where there many client questions rarely have a clear-cut answer. Instead, they are based on a risk analysis. The legality can turn on the particular structure of a game, how money moves through the product, how a promotion is presented, or how a regulator is likely to interpret a provision. New products test the limits of legislation in ways not anticipated by its drafters.

Despite this uncertainty, we attempt to the greatest extent possible to provide clients with clear, practical business-focused advice. While we identify the risks for them, we also put ourselves in their shoes and try to put such risks in context. That is particularly important in a developing market like Canadian iGaming, where legislation, regulatory standards and enforcement practice continue to evolve. Our focus is on being proactive, responsive, and clear. This means responding promptly, communicating clearly and, most importantly, giving clients practical, actionable advice.

5. What technological advancements are reshaping gambling law and how can clients benefit from them?

The most significant advancement for our practice is generative AI. The use of these tools by lawyers has become increasingly common. The Code of Professional Conduct for British Columbia now says in its commentary on competence that a lawyer should develop an understanding of, and ability to use, technology relevant to the lawyer’s practice, including its benefits and risks.

For clients, the benefit is not simply that lawyers can produce documents more quickly. AI can also allow lawyers to work through large volumes of regulatory material and compare requirements across jurisdictions more efficiently. For an operator considering expansion into a new province, for example, that can mean getting an initial view of licensing requirements, product restrictions and compliance obligations more quickly, and at a lower cost. It can also help us review long operator and supplier agreements, identify issues across multiple versions of a document and spend more time on the questions that require legal judgment. For clients operating in a fast-moving market, that can make it easier to assess a new product or market opportunity before committing significant resources to it.

Those benefits come with duties. Lawyers remain responsible for reviewing AI output, must protect client confidentiality when deciding what to enter into a tool, and need to understand how the tool stores information. We see AI as a tool for improving the speed and efficiency of our work, rather than replacing the lawyer’s responsibility to verify the law, understand the client’s business and exercise judgment.

6. Describe a particularly interesting or complex matter you have advised on recently, and explain the challenges involved, your approach, and the outcome achieved for the client?

We routinely help clients apply to enter the Alberta and Ontario markets. In both provinces, an operator must complete two tracks: registration with the regulator and an agreement with the entity that conducts and manages the market.

The challenges are practical. The two tracks have to be sequenced so that neither delays the other. Suppliers must be registered, have their technology certified by an accredited testing facility and integrate with the self-exclusion program. In Alberta, operators that were already serving players had to move from unregulated to regulated activity within a set transition window, with a possible finding of unsuitability if they did not follow the guidance. These steps turn on knowing what each regulator expects to see, how its standards are applied in practice, and how the industry’s platform, payments and supplier providers fit together.

Our approach is to prepare the corporate, ownership and financial disclosure early, to coordinate suppliers before the regulator asks about them, and to keep open, professional working relationships with regulatory staff so that questions are resolved before they hold up a file. We often act as the “quarterback” for an application with the client’s other service providers, including accountants, insurance providers, banks, and various other suppliers such as geolocation service providers and independent testing labs, and often make introductions in these areas to clients wishing to access the Canadian market.