In a recent ruling, a Brazilian court determined that a participant who was excluded from a Mega-Sena lottery pool is entitled to receive R$ 160,000 following the pool's remarkable win of R$ 206 million. The case (concurso 2.696) gained attention not only for the staggering sum involved but also for the legal implications surrounding verbal agreements in informal lottery pools. The judge concluded that even in the absence of a written contract, the verbal arrangement made between the participant and the pool organizer constitutes a binding agreement that must be honored.

The controversy arose when the excluded participant claimed to have fulfilled their financial obligations by paying their share, but the organizer contended that the payment was made outside the required time frame and, as such, should not be considered valid. However, the court found sufficient evidence that the participant had indeed sent proof of payment before the lottery draw took place. The organizer had viewed the message but failed to reject the participant's claim or return the payment, adding weight to the court's decision.

This ruling highlights the growing importance of clarity and accountability in informal group betting practices, where verbal agreements are often the norm. Following such high-stakes outcomes, both participants and organizers will likely reevaluate their practices to avoid future legal disputes. This situation serves as a reminder that even in informal settings, agreements can carry significant legal weight, incentivizing clearer communication in lottery participations.