The Advocate General of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has issued advice that consumers who played on unlicensed gambling services from another EU Member State may seek to recover their losses under national law.
The Legal Body issued its notice on the unsettled dispute of Case C‑440/23 (FB v European Lotto and Betting Ltd and Deutsche Lotto Und Sportwetten Ltd).
The case requires a determination on the application of national laws on cross-border disputes related to gambling and European Union (EU) member states..
The original dispute dates back to the period between 2019 and 2021, when a German player filed a claim for the recovery of gambling losses against Lottoland, arguing that the online slot games he had participated in were prohibited under German law.
Due to a lack of progress in the initial proceedings, the customer assigned the claim to a new legal representative in 2023, known as FB, who subsequently filed a new lawsuit in the Maltese courts, seeking reimbursement of the losses from the Maltese-licensed operators.
The Maltese courts submitted the case to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) for legal oversight, as fundamental determinations were needed regarding the compatibility of national gambling laws with EU law, particularly the freedom to provide services under Article 56 TFEU.
Tensions over the longstanding dispute continue to elevate, as clarity over the decision is still yet to be found. However, the Advocate General has legitimised the case, advising that it is not an abuse of EU Law.
The Advocate General isn’t binding, however, his advice does serve to guide the ruling of the CJEU, the final ruling will however lie with the judges.
This is advice that clearly resonates with two cases involving German and Austrian players, brought against Maltese-licensed operators over the returning of funds lost.
Key to the defence put forward by Maltese operators is the European Freedom of movement framework, nonetheless, the Advocate General came to the decision that the appeal of the players was not in breach of EU rules.
It also brings into question Bill 55, which strengthens Maltese safeguards from international legal action from other jurisdictions, the latest decision further escalates the tussle between Germany and Malta over the bill and the legislative volatility between the two countries.
The MGA has previously underlined that the bill is seeking to protect Maltese operators from “baseless legal challenges”.
German regulator, the GGL, has persistently urged for a reexamining of the legislation of Bill 55. Having gone on record as stating: “We are of the opinion that this law should not be compatible with European requirements for the recognition of decisions (Regulation (EU) 1215/2002).
“However, the final assessment of this question is not the responsibility of the GGL. We have informed the federal states of our assessment and are otherwise in contact with the relevant authorities.”
A final decision over the case is anticipated in the Autumn of this year.
