Adrian Portelli Sues Former South Australian Minister Over Lottery Comments
By Neha Maurya · Published 13 Jun 2026 · Updated 13 Jun 2026
Adelaide, South Australia · South Australia News
Safety note: Admin approval is an initial review, not a guarantee that every detail is correct. Check important or urgent claims with official sources and report anything inaccurate or unsafe.
Source and credit: Contributor's own report
Adrian Portelli Sues Former South Australian Minister Over Lottery Comments - Adelaide, South Australia
Smart summary
Melbourne businessman Adrian Portelli has launched defamation proceedings against former South Australian minister Andrea Michaels over remarks she made regarding his LMCT+ rewards club business.
Melbourne entrepreneur Adrian Portelli, widely known through his luxury prize giveaway business LMCT+, has commenced defamation proceedings against former South Australian consumer affairs minister Andrea Michaels over comments she made concerning his company's operations in the state.
The case, which had its first hearing in the South Australian Supreme Court on Friday, centres on statements Michaels made after a South Australian woman won a multimillion-dollar property through an LMCT+ promotion but was later found to be ineligible to claim the prize under South Australian law.
LMCT+ operates as a membership-based rewards club, offering subscribers discounts and access to prize draws featuring high-value items such as luxury vehicles, cash and residential properties. The business gained national attention after Portelli purchased several homes featured on the television series The Block and incorporated them into promotional giveaways.
Under South Australia's gambling regulations, residents are subject to specific restrictions relating to trade promotion lotteries and prize competitions. Following the controversy involving the South Australian winner, Michaels publicly described the situation as "awful" and "terrible", expressing concern about the impact on the woman involved.
According to court documents, Portelli alleges that Michaels' comments conveyed defamatory meanings that damaged his personal and professional reputation.
The lawsuit specifically references statements reportedly made during media interviews and press conferences while Michaels was serving as Minister for Consumer and Business Affairs. Portelli contends the remarks suggested he knowingly engaged in unlawful conduct by accepting money from South Australian participants despite their inability to legally receive certain prizes.
Michaels had previously stated that Portelli had "created an awful situation" for the South Australian woman involved by permitting her to enter and ultimately win the competition despite regulatory limitations applying within the state.
The defamation proceedings emerge against the backdrop of broader legal scrutiny surrounding LMCT+'s business model.
Earlier this year, Xclusive Tech Pty Ltd, the company trading as LMCT+, was found guilty of conducting unlawful lotteries in South Australia and fined $40,000. However, Portelli himself was found not guilty of related charges brought against him personally.
Portelli has consistently defended the legitimacy of his business operations, maintaining that LMCT+ provides genuine products and services alongside promotional giveaways. He has also argued that differing regulations between Australian jurisdictions have contributed to confusion regarding compliance requirements.
The latest court action highlights the complex intersection between consumer protection laws, gambling regulations and reputational rights.
Defamation cases involving public figures often require courts to carefully assess whether statements constituted fair comment made in the public interest or whether they crossed the threshold into unlawfully damaging an individual's reputation.
At this stage, the Supreme Court has not considered the substantive merits of Portelli's claims. The initial hearing focused on procedural matters, and the case is expected to progress through the legal system in the coming months.
As the proceedings continue, both Portelli and Michaels will have an opportunity to present their respective arguments before the court.
The matter also serves as a reminder that high-profile disputes involving business regulation can extend beyond questions of legality and enter the realm of reputation, accountability and the limits of political commentary.
As with all civil litigation, the allegations made by the parties remain subject to judicial determination.
PortelliSouthMichaelsBusinessLmct
Melbourne entrepreneur Adrian Portelli, widely known through his luxury prize giveaway business LMCT+, has commenced defamation proceedings against former South Australian consumer affairs minister Andrea Michaels over comments she made concerning his company's operations in the state.
The case, which had its first hearing in the South Australian Supreme Court on Friday, centres on statements Michaels made after a South Australian woman won a multimillion-dollar property through an LMCT+ promotion but was later found to be ineligible to claim the prize under South Australian law.
LMCT+ operates as a membership-based rewards club, offering subscribers discounts and access to prize draws featuring high-value items such as luxury vehicles, cash and residential properties. The business gained national attention after Portelli purchased several homes featured on the television series The Block and incorporated them into promotional giveaways.
Under South Australia's gambling regulations, residents are subject to specific restrictions relating to trade promotion lotteries and prize competitions. Following the controversy involving the South Australian winner, Michaels publicly described the situation as "awful" and "terrible", expressing concern about the impact on the woman involved.
According to court documents, Portelli alleges that Michaels' comments conveyed defamatory meanings that damaged his personal and professional reputation.
The lawsuit specifically references statements reportedly made during media interviews and press conferences while Michaels was serving as Minister for Consumer and Business Affairs. Portelli contends the remarks suggested he knowingly engaged in unlawful conduct by accepting money from South Australian participants despite their inability to legally receive certain prizes.
Michaels had previously stated that Portelli had "created an awful situation" for the South Australian woman involved by permitting her to enter and ultimately win the competition despite regulatory limitations applying within the state.
The defamation proceedings emerge against the backdrop of broader legal scrutiny surrounding LMCT+'s business model.
Earlier this year, Xclusive Tech Pty Ltd, the company trading as LMCT+, was found guilty of conducting unlawful lotteries in South Australia and fined $40,000. However, Portelli himself was found not guilty of related charges brought against him personally.
Portelli has consistently defended the legitimacy of his business operations, maintaining that LMCT+ provides genuine products and services alongside promotional giveaways. He has also argued that differing regulations between Australian jurisdictions have contributed to confusion regarding compliance requirements.
The latest court action highlights the complex intersection between consumer protection laws, gambling regulations and reputational rights.
Defamation cases involving public figures often require courts to carefully assess whether statements constituted fair comment made in the public interest or whether they crossed the threshold into unlawfully damaging an individual's reputation.
At this stage, the Supreme Court has not considered the substantive merits of Portelli's claims. The initial hearing focused on procedural matters, and the case is expected to progress through the legal system in the coming months.
As the proceedings continue, both Portelli and Michaels will have an opportunity to present their respective arguments before the court.
The matter also serves as a reminder that high-profile disputes involving business regulation can extend beyond questions of legality and enter the realm of reputation, accountability and the limits of political commentary.
As with all civil litigation, the allegations made by the parties remain subject to judicial determination.
Australian property values have fallen for seven consecutive months, with the national median home value dropping approximately $63,400 since March as h...
Around 8,000 customers in Western Australia's coastal city of Albany will need to replace gas appliances with electric alternatives or switch to bottled...
Buyers from Sydney and Melbourne are purchasing homes in Alice Springs at a rapid pace, attracted by strong rental returns and limited housing availabil...
Growing awareness of Auslan is highlighting the importance of teaching children sign language and helping them communicate with people who are deaf or h...
A psychiatric report presented to South Australia's Supreme Court has raised questions about Tamika Chesser's mental competence in the case involving th...
Residents have rallied against a proposed 1,200-megawatt artificial intelligence data centre near Tungkillo, raising concerns about water supplies, land...
South Australian health authorities report 22 meningococcal disease cases this year and urge eligible residents to receive vaccination as contact tracin...
South Australian detectives have arrested a second man over a series of alleged business break-ins, thefts and property damage incidents across metropol...
Police are investigating after a one-year-old child died following a house fire in Collie, while several other people inside the property escaped safely.
A psychiatric report presented to South Australia's Supreme Court has raised questions about Tamika Chesser's mental competence in the case involving th...
A freedom of information request has revealed that Gold Coast Council does not hold a copy of the invoice for Mayor Tom Tate's three-day stay at Donald...