On September 4, 2026, a Singapore High Court blocked Venetian Macao from enforcing a $2.5 million gambling debt against a casino customer, arguing that the debt collection would go against the country’s policy.
The case involved Hu Yangning, a businesswoman who had been a VIP customer at Marina Bay Sands before being introduced to The Venetian Macao. She gambled at the Macao casino between 2011 and 2024 and received casino credit of up to $1.9 million in 2023.
After Hu failed to repay the amount, Venetian Macao obtained a default judgment from a Hong Kong court in March 2025 ordering her to pay $2.5 million, plus 18% annual interest from October 2024 and legal costs, after which the casino registered the judgment in Singapore and got an order to seize and sell Hu’s property there.
Hu challenged the registration, arguing that enforcement would conflict with Singapore’s public policy on gambling debts, with Justice Philip Jeyaretnam later agreeing and setting aside the registration order. The judge said that the ruling relied on Section 5(2) of the Civil Law Act, which prevents court action to recover gambling debts.
The court also rejected Venetian Macao’s reliance on an earlier case involving an Australian casino, finding that it was decided under a different law that has since been repealed.
The ruling doesn’t cancel the Hong Kong judgment or establish that Hu doesn’t owe the money; however, it means that Singapore courts can’t be used to enforce this gambling debt.
