Black Cube has asked the Superior Court of New Jersey to dismiss the Evolution lawsuit accusing it of defamation, filed in 2021. A hearing is set for 16 November, and the intelligence firm’s case now rests largely on two documents that came from Evolution itself.
The first is the Spectrum Gaming Group review Evolution commissioned in 2022 to answer Black Cube’s allegations. The second is the £4.75m settlement Evolution agreed with Great Britain’s Gambling Commission in July. Black Cube argues in its court filings that both support the report it delivered to US regulators in November 2021. How the court rules will also decide whether Evolution gets another chance to add Playtech, the rival supplier that paid for that report, to the case.
What Black Cube is asking the court to do
Black Cube’s motion is brought under the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA), New Jersey’s anti-SLAPP law. The statute lets a defendant sued over communications to a government body seek early dismissal. Once the defendant shows the claim arises from that kind of communication, the claimant has to show a prima facie case for each element of each claim. A defendant that wins recovers its legal costs.
Black Cube first invoked UPEPA in late 2025, when it argued that its submissions to gaming regulators were protected speech and filed video recordings it said showed Evolution games played from Iran, Russia and Syria. Evolution challenged the recordings, pointing to private IP addresses and timestamp inconsistencies, and argued that a report paid for by a competitor is commercial speech outside the statute’s protection.
The hearing on 16 November will not decide whether the 2021 report was true. It will decide whether Evolution’s claims against Black Cube survive to be argued on the merits. Judge John C. Porto presides over the case. Either side can appeal the ruling.
The Spectrum report
Evolution hired Spectrum to review the allegations and has described the outcome as clearing it. Black Cube obtained the report in discovery, and on 20 August Robert Kugler, the retired federal judge appointed as special adjudicator, lifted its confidentiality protection. The full text is now on the public court docket.
The report did not conclude that Evolution had broken the law. It did record gaps in how the supplier monitors the operators that carry its games. Playtech said in September that Spectrum found Evolution “does not take any proactive steps” to check whether those operators comply with their contracts, and that Evolution did not hand over gaming session data and revenue reports for Iran, Syria and Sudan that Spectrum requested.
In its first-half 2026 results, Playtech wrote that the report “corroborates fundamental aspects of the Black Cube investigation.” Evolution’s position is that Spectrum did not confirm the central allegation that it took bets from sanctioned markets.
The £4.75m UK settlement
The Gambling Commission’s public statement of 23 July found that 5 Evolution games were available on 6 websites run by 2 operators without a British licence. The licence review found that Evolution Malta Holding’s anti-money laundering risk assessment was not appropriate between April 2024 and January 2025, in breach of licence conditions 12.1.1 and 12.1.2.
Evolution agreed to a payment of £4.75m in lieu of a financial penalty, an independent audit of its policies and controls within 12 months, and a contribution to the Commission’s costs. The Commission listed the detection of illegal market activity and financial gain to the licensee as aggravating factors. It credited Evolution for accepting the failings early and cooperating. Evolution said at the time that the two operators had actively evaded its restrictions and that the review found no broader pattern of unlicensed access.
Black Cube first cited the settlement in a 3 August filing, arguing it showed the supplier’s controls failed in the way its report described. Evolution answers on dates: the Commission’s findings cover 2024 and 2025, while Black Cube’s report was written in November 2021 about earlier conduct.
How the case got here
Law firm Calcagni & Kanefsky LLP sent the Black Cube report to the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement (DGE) and the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board (PGCB) in November 2021. Bloomberg reported the allegations on 16 November 2021, and Evolution’s shares fell. Evolution sued Calcagni & Kanefsky and unnamed parties the following month.
Both regulators closed their reviews in February 2024 without corrective action, according to Evolution. The court ordered disclosure of the report’s backers on 28 February 2025, and Black Cube was added as a defendant on 11 June 2025. On 21 October 2025, Evolution named Playtech Software Limited as the client that commissioned the report.
On 9 April 2026, Evolution asked the court for permission to add Playtech plc, Playtech Software Limited, public relations executive Juda Engelmayer and others as defendants, with claims including trade libel, fraud and racketeering.
Playtech hired Black Cube to create and publicize a defamatory report designed to harm Evolution, all while misleading the market and lying to investors about its role.
Evolution, statement of 9 April 2026
Playtech rejects the allegations. Its half-year report states that it “stands behind its decision to commission the report and disputes any allegations of unlawful conduct,” and that no claim has been served on Playtech plc or any of its subsidiaries. Its directors treat the matter as a contingent liability.
What the Evolution lawsuit ruling means for Playtech
On 5 June, the judge denied Evolution’s motion to add Playtech and the other parties without prejudice, according to Playtech’s results. The court chose to evaluate the existing claims first, principally at the UPEPA hearing.
That makes the 16 November hearing the gate for the wider case. If the defendants win dismissal, the claims fall away and Evolution would have no live action to which Playtech could be added. If Evolution’s claims survive, it can file a new motion to bring Playtech in, and the dispute would move toward the merits with the Spectrum report and the Commission’s findings already in the record. If the court strikes some claims and keeps others, the scope of any renewed motion narrows with it.
The stakes for the two suppliers are uneven. Evolution has said the 2021 report caused multi-billion-dollar damage to the company and that it will seek substantial damages from Playtech. For Playtech, the case remains a contingent liability while no claim is served. Evolution reported third-quarter revenue of €526.1m, up 3.7%.
Next steps
The court hears Black Cube’s UPEPA motion on 16 November. A written ruling is expected to follow later, and the losing side can appeal. If the case survives, Evolution’s first move is a renewed motion to add Playtech plc and Playtech Software Limited as defendants. Evolution’s independent audit under the Commission settlement is due within 12 months of the end of the licence review.
Source: Superior Court of New Jersey
