For some lawyers, anyway.
EG's clients lost completely. They didn't have much on their side apart from EG. Assuming (for argument's sake) the cab rank rule applies in Canada, a strict application says that EG was obliged to take the gamblers' case provided they met his fee.
I wonder, though, what else it means that it wasn't BG on the appeal.
"Frank"ly speaking, that is.
Moreira v. Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation, 2013 ONCA 121. You can read about it in the papers. The short summary is: Gamblers lose; house wins. Again. Go figure.