A Queensland cruiser has successfully appealed a tribunal decision in his dispute with Royal Caribbean over five complimentary Casino Royale cruises valued at more than $22,000.
But despite some headlines suggesting Mark Timothy Grant has already won his fight against the cruise line, the actual decision is a little more complicated.
Grant has successfully argued that the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT) can hear his consumer dispute with RCL Cruises Ltd, trading as Royal Caribbean Cruises.
Whether Royal Caribbean was entitled to cancel the five cruises and place him on its no-sail list is still to be decided.
Five complimentary cruises cancelled
According to the QCAT proceedings, the dispute centres around complimentary cruises Grant says he earned through Royal Caribbean’s Casino Royale program.
Five cruises with a claimed total value of $22,040 were subsequently cancelled after Royal Caribbean reviewed Grant’s casino activity.
Royal Caribbean also placed Grant on its no-sail list, alleging he had breached casino terms and conditions.
Grant disputes Royal Caribbean’s position and is seeking compensation for the cancelled cruises.
The case is Mark Timothy Grant v RCL Cruises Ltd t/as Royal Caribbean Cruises [2026] QCATA 137, with the appeal decision handed down by Senior Member Samantha Traves on 14 September 2026.
What QCAT actually decided
This is where the distinction becomes important.
QCAT has not ruled that Royal Caribbean was wrong to cancel Grant’s cruises, nor has it ordered the cruise line to pay him $22,040.
Grant’s original consumer and trader dispute had been dismissed after the tribunal found it did not have jurisdiction to hear the matter.
He appealed that decision.
The appeal tribunal found the original decision was incorrect and accepted that the circumstances were capable of creating a consumer contract between Grant and Royal Caribbean.
That means his dispute can return to QCAT to be considered on its merits.
In other words, Grant has won the right to continue his case against Royal Caribbean. He hasn’t yet won the underlying case.
This isn't Grant's first casino dispute
There’s another interesting piece of history behind the case.
Grant was previously involved in a lengthy dispute with The Star Entertainment Queensland after he and another gambler were excluded from The Star Gold Coast and Treasury Brisbane casinos in 2018.
The Star alleged the pair had engaged in conduct including card counting and behaviour it described as similar to “edge sorting”, a technique involving differences in the patterns on the backs of playing cards.
Grant denied cheating.
That dispute eventually reached QCAT, which ruled in 2022 that there were no reasonable grounds to exclude Grant and the other player over the alleged conduct.
The tribunal found the pair had not engaged in edge sorting as alleged and that their conduct did not amount to dishonesty.
Their exclusion notices were set aside.
The previous case doesn’t establish what happened during Grant’s gambling with Royal Caribbean, and the allegations in the current dispute are separate. However, it provides some interesting background to a cruiser who is clearly no stranger to challenging casino decisions through the tribunal system.
What happens next?
The substantive Royal Caribbean dispute now needs to return to QCAT.
That hearing could examine whether Grant was entitled to the complimentary cruises he had earned through Casino Royale, whether Royal Caribbean was entitled to cancel them under its casino terms and conditions, and whether any compensation is payable.
Until that happens, there has been no finding that either Grant or Royal Caribbean was ultimately in the right over the cancelled cruises.
For cruise passengers who participate heavily in onboard casino programs, though, the case could be an interesting one to watch.
Complimentary cruises can be one of the more valuable rewards offered through cruise casino loyalty programs, and the eventual decision may provide some useful guidance about how those rewards interact with Australian consumer law when a cruise line subsequently withdraws them.
Sources: Queensland Judgments, Mark Timothy Grant v RCL Cruises Ltd t/as Royal Caribbean Cruises [2026] QCATA 137; ABC News reporting and QCAT decision regarding Grant & Anor v The Star Entertainment Qld Ltd [2022] QCAT 289.
