Evolution supplier permissions: named entities and regulator records

A procurement team checking an Evolution supply arrangement needs a named holder and a defined activity. The records below identify a British account and four linked Malta licensee views. They do not establish permission for every Evolution company, client, game or destination.

The practical difference is visible in the names: Evolution Malta Holding Limited appears in the British summary, while Evolution Gaming Malta Limited, Evolution Malta Services Limited, Evolution Malta Limited and Livespins Ltd. appear in the Malta selector. Preserve those names and their references in the research handoff.

UKGC account 41655 displays Active remote Gambling Software and Game Host (Casino) activities. Both show reference 041655-R-322523-013, From 1 Oct 2026 and To Current. That is the date displayed for these rows, not evidence of when the business first obtained any licence.

The Commission's host guidance describes a model in which a software business hosts casino games through other operators' platforms. Its conditions include holding a software operating licence and having no direct contract with the players using those games. Read the host label in that context; it does not identify a client's consumer-domain permission.

The MGA Evolution selector links four licensees. Each linked view displays Licensed status, B2B - Critical Supply Licence, Type 1 Gaming Services and the approved vertical Casino. The extract includes all four views, including Livespins Ltd.; it does not select only companies whose names contain Evolution.

Keep MGA/CRP/187/2010 for Evolution Gaming Malta Limited, -02 for Evolution Malta Services Limited, -01 for Evolution Malta Limited and -06 for Livespins Ltd. The suffix is part of the published reference. Replacing these with a single group label loses the holder-level distinction.

The MGA's guidance allows corporate group licensing and identifies the nominal holder's responsibilities. The existence of four linked views therefore does not, by itself, establish four independent group licences. The same guidance requires prior approval for gaming verticals. Its broad Type 1 definition is not a substitute for the Casino vertical actually displayed in these views.

The views also list Ezugi Ro S.R.L., RN/141/2019, under approved service providers. That is a separate field in these records. The download preserves it without treating it as a fifth licensee view or independently assessing the recognition notice.

Fictional procurement example: a draft supply agreement names Evolution Malta Services Limited, and the evidence pack attaches only UKGC account 41655. The pack has not established that the proposed contracting entity is the British holder: the attached summary names Evolution Malta Holding Limited.

The Malta view does name Evolution Malta Services Limited and shows MGA/CRP/187/2010-02 with the scope above. That resolves a different record question. It does not explain the contractual relationship to the British holder or establish the planned distribution arrangement.

The next research request is concrete: identify the entity performing the relevant activity, obtain the applicable holder record for that role, and document the contractual or distribution chain. Check the client's own destination and product permission separately. Keep the mismatch open until evidence resolves it.

Atlas also inspected the AGCC's online extracts for eGambling licensees, Category 1 and 2 associate certificates, core service provider associates and hosting providers on 6 November. No entry under an Evolution name was located in those four extracts. This is a scoped observation about the inspected pages, not a group-wide finding.

The AGCC says its online pages are extracts from a register that is available for public inspection by prior appointment. Atlas has not inspected that underlying register or obtained a current Evolution holder-level decision, certificate or operational approval. Alderney is therefore excluded from the positive-record CSV.

A missing name cannot establish surrender, suspension, revocation or unlawful supply. To resolve a specific Alderney claim, obtain the exact current holder, instrument, category and relevant dates, then the operational evidence applicable to the proposed arrangement. An old company statement cannot fill those current fields.

Filter the CSV by the exact legal entity first. Then compare the authority, reference, activity, status and any displayed dates with the proposed arrangement. The file keeps source locators and the actual reading date so another reviewer can reproduce each included observation.

All six selected observations are included. Not displayed means the field was absent from that source view; it does not mean that no underlying condition, date or document exists. Current is retained as the British source's end-field text, not converted into a perpetual term.

This case adds completed entity-level evidence to the existing general guides. It does not assess game versions, technical reports, private licence conditions, every subsidiary, every market or a client's consumer access. The separate Evolution Watch brief covers the British enforcement event and its distribution-control findings.

iGaming Atlas Research Desk read the complete returned British account summary, MGA selector and four linked authorisation bodies on 6 November 2026. The six-row extract is an original transcription and comparison of the selected records. The linked authority guidance explains the specific activity and vertical distinctions; it does not expand the holder findings.

The evidence reading date is separate from a source publication date, a displayed activity date or a licence expiry. The Malta views did not display a start or expiry date, and no date has been inferred from a reference number.

The Research Desk will recheck these selected records by 13 November 2026, or earlier if a holder, status, activity, vertical or source changes. Alderney remains open until a current holder-level record and applicable operational evidence are obtained. These article checks do not renew the evidence dates on Atlas market or operator records.