The Superior Court of New Jersey has denied Evolution’s request to add Playtech as an additional defendant in its ongoing libel lawsuit against Israeli intelligence firm Black Cube.
The Stockholm-listed supplier first sent its request to the court in April as it looked to bolster its case against Black Cube and law firm Calcagni & Kanefsky LLP.
This order from the court rejects that request, and ensures that Evolution will have to go through with its existing Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA) hearing with Black Cube and Calcagni & Kanefsky in November 2026.
Upon completion of the hearing, Evolution could still choose to take further action and look to add Playtech to the lawsuit once again.
The Superior Court held an in-person conference with the two parties in May, where each side was given the opportunity to argue their case.
Authorised by Superior Court Judge John C Porto, the court document read: “This matter, having come before the court on the motions of plaintiffs Evolution AB, Evolution US LLC and Ezugi NJ LLC, for relief from the stay entered in this action pursuant to the motion for relief, and for leave to file a second amendment complaint (the “Motion for Leave”), and the court having held an in-person conference with the parties on 20 May 2026, considered the parties’ submissions and heard oral argument; and for good cause shown.
“It is on this fifth day of June 2026, ordered that Evolution’s Motion for Relief and Motion for Leave are denied without prejudice.”
In the filing, Evolution alleged that Playtech, alongside other defendants including Juda Engelmayer, took part in “commissioning and disseminating highly inflammatory and defamatory reports about Evolution’s business practices in an effort to harm its reputation”.
The suit also accused Playtech of trade libel, fraud, racketeering and witholding information about its conduct from shareholders.
An Evolution statement said: “The court has not made any substantive decision on our motion to add Playtech to the case, but has pushed that decision until after Black Cube’s UPEPA motion is decided. That’s the practical effect of the denial without prejudice.”
Playtech reiterated it “stands by both the decision to commission the report at the centre of Evolution’s claims” and that the company will “defend itself vigorously against Evolution’s claims”.
The lawsuit dates back to October 2025, when Evolution accused Playtech of commissioning an investigation by Black Cube which contained “highly inflammatory and knowingly false claims”.
The allegation claimed Playtech paid more than £1.8m for the report, which was then fed to media and regulators by Calcagni & Kanefsky LLP in November 2021.
Evolution also alleged Calcagni & Kanefsky, which represents Black Cube, received $33,700 for its part in proceedings.
The commissioned report stated Evolution’s games were available in black markets such as Iran, Syria and Sudan.
Evolution also attested Black Cube’s investigation included secret recordings of at least five former or current Evolution board members and employees.
The lawsuit against the law firm and other parties behind the report was officially filed in December 2025 with the Superior Court of New Jersey.
The complaint was for defamation, trade libel, tortious interference with prospective economic advantage, fraud and other illegal conduct.
The post Court denies Evolution request to add Playtech as lawsuit defendant first appeared on EGR Intel.
Superior Court of New Jersey dismisses motion, meaning the Stockholm-listed supplier will have to proceed with its existing hearing in November
The post Court denies Evolution request to add Playtech as lawsuit defendant first appeared on EGR Intel.