RESEARCH METHOD
The regulatory evidence record: documenting a rule properly
A rule written down without its source, scope and review date becomes unreliable within months. The evidence record is a simple template that ties each rule to the official document, the enforcement that shows how it is applied, and the date it must be checked again.
- Record the rule in the regulator's words, not a paraphrase, with a link to the official document.
- State the jurisdiction, product and who the rule applies to (operator, affiliate, supplier).
- Link published enforcement that shows how the rule is applied in practice.
- Give every record a checked date and a next review date.
A regulatory evidence record is a one-page entry that documents a single rule: what it says, where it comes from, whom it binds, how regulators have enforced it and when it was last checked. Compliance and marketing teams use records like this so that a rule quoted in a campaign review or a market-entry memo can be traced back to its source months later. This page gives the template we use and a worked example.
The fields
| Field | What to write |
|---|---|
| Rule (verbatim) | The exact wording from the official text, in quotation marks |
| Source document | Title, section or rule number, and URL on the regulator's own domain |
| Version or last updated | The date or version shown on the document |
| Jurisdiction | Country, state or province; note if it differs within a country |
| Applies to | Operators, affiliates, suppliers, all advertisers; and which products |
| Status | Mandatory requirement, guidance, or industry code |
| Enforcement | Links to decisions applying the rule, with outcome |
| Interpretation notes | Your reading, clearly separated from the rule itself |
| Checked by and date | Who checked the source and when |
| Next review | A date, set by how often the source changes |
Worked example: strong appeal to under-18s (Great Britain)
| Rule | CAP Code rule 16.3.12, verbatim: "Marketing communications must not: ... be likely to be of strong appeal to children or young persons, especially by reflecting or being associated with youth culture." The rule continues that they "must not include a person or character whose example is likely to be followed by those aged under 18 years or who has a strong appeal to those aged under 18". |
| Source | CAP Code section 16, gambling; broadcast equivalent BCAP rule 17.4.5 |
| Guidance | CAP and BCAP guidance on protecting under-18s, updated 14 October 2025 |
| Jurisdiction | United Kingdom |
| Applies to | All gambling marketing within the ASA's remit, including operators' own social posts and, since 1 September 2025, non-paid online content by overseas operators licensed in Great Britain; affiliates' ads are covered too |
| Status | Mandatory code rule; compliance is also a Gambling Commission licence expectation |
| Enforcement | 15 ASA rulings in 2025 and 2026, 9 upheld: see our ASA tracker |
| Interpretation notes | Upheld cases featured footballers with large young followings and club logos; not-upheld cases featured personalities judged to appeal mainly to adults |
| Checked | 24 October 2026 |
| Next review | 24 January 2027, or on any CAP guidance update |
Setting review dates
Review frequency should follow how often the source changes. Advertising guidance and enforcement trackers change monthly; licence conditions a few times a year; statutes rarely. The Gambling Commission's Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice, for example, carry a version date, and the AGCO's Registrar's Standards show when they were last updated. Our source directory lists where each regulator publishes its rules, so the review can start from the right page.
Common mistakes
Paraphrasing a rule and losing a qualifier is the most frequent error. The second is recording a rule for one product or jurisdiction and applying it to another; a British rule on bonus wagering caps says nothing about Ontario inducements. The third is treating guidance or a not-upheld ruling as a requirement. The fourth is having no review date at all, so a record silently goes out of date.
Questions about evidence records
Why link enforcement to a rule?
Enforcement shows how a regulator applies the wording in practice. Two ads can both mention a footballer, and the ASA rulings show which features made one breach the rule and the other not.
How often should records be reviewed?
At least as often as the source changes: monthly for advertising guidance and enforcement, quarterly for licence conditions, and on any announced change.