It took just three seconds in court 75 at the court of appeal on The Strand in London yesterday to consign five years of effort, planning and lobbying by the British Horseracing Board to the dustbin of history.

"The appeal by William Hill is allowed," Lord Justice Jacobs said simply, as he handed down a judgment that throws plans for the funding of racing beyond 2009 into disarray.

The decision, delivered in conjunction with Lord Justice Pill and Lord Justice Clarke, ran to 11 pages, but its thrust is simple. The BHB's long-cherished ambition to raise at least £100m a year from the sale of pre-race data to bookmakers is now unworkable because, in the opinion of the court, that data is not theirs to sell.

Yesterday's decision franked the surprising verdict of the European court of justice in the same case, delivered last November, which effectively decided that bookmakers can use data such as the names of runners and riders free of charge.

The twists and turns of the case are now history, though. What faces the BHB, indeed the entire British racing industry, this morning is an uncertain future and, in the long term, a huge hole in the balance sheet and the prospect of negotiating with the bookmakers from a position of weakness that could border on desperation.

One immediate problem for the BHB is that a number of bookmakers, mostly based in Ireland, are already paying for pre-race data under licence.

Last year, those fees amounted to almost £13m, and though the BHB insists its contracts are watertight and that no refunds are due, a court case due to be heard in Dublin later this year could put that claim to the test.

Should the BHB lose, and be ordered to repay monies already received, it seems possible that racing's ruling body would be insolvent.

Even if that hurdle is cleared, yesterday's judgment could have profound effects on the structure of British racing.

Having successfully lobbied the British government to introduce enabling legislation to scrap the Levy - without, as it now proves, first establishing a solid alternative source of funds - the BHB could ask (or should that be beg?) it to reconsider.

Should the British government politely decline to re-enter the messy, thankless business of racing's finances, two possibilities remain to secure the sport's share of betting profits beyond 2009.

The first is that the BHB working party under Lord Donoughue, which is considering commercial alternatives to data payments, will have a "Eureka" moment, and hit upon an acceptable, legally flawless way to get £100m a year out of the bookies. The second, more credible, scenario is that talks will open with the bookies, who will agree to keep their contributions at, or around, the current level - on certain conditions.

More all-weather Flat racing, from the total of six - at least - such courses that will be staging racing within two years, is one obvious demand that could boost bookmakers' turnover and profits, but could prove fatal for a number of smaller tracks, particularly those with only National Hunt racing to offer.

"This is a black day for racing, because it prevents the lift-off that we have all been working for, but it is not a crisis," Martin Broughton, the BHB chairman, said at a press conference following yesterday's judgment. However, the look on his face, and that of Greg Nichols, the BHB's chief executive sitting alongside him, suggested otherwise.

Nichols, who has worked on the data-rights scheme since it was first promoted by Peter Savill, Broughton's predecessor, seemed resigned to a possible return to a statutory funding mechanism.