Woohoo is not a game of chance  

The Brussels Criminal Court has acquitted the National Lottery and its managing director, Jannie Haek, in the Woohoo online gaming case. The ruling, handed down on 29 May, confirms that these games fall under the online lottery regulations and not under the law on games of chance.  

A much-anticipated decision in the Woohoo case  

This decision brings to an end a sensitive legal proceeding for the National Lottery. The Brussels Criminal Court has acquitted the National Lottery and its managing director, Jannie Haek, in the Woohoo case, which concerns instant lottery games offered online.  

Should Woohoo games be considered games of chance, subject to a licence from the Gaming Commission, or online lottery games falling within the specific framework of the National Lottery? The court has ruled. According to the judgement handed down on 29 May, these games are indeed online lottery games, provided that their outcome is not influenced by the behaviour of the players. This assessment is based in particular on a ruling by the Constitutional Court of 11 December 2025, cited in the proceedings. 

Woohoo games therefore do not fall within the scope of the Gambling Act. Consequently, organising and making them available does not require a licence from the Gaming Commission. The court concluded that the National Lottery and Jannie Haek had not committed an offence under this Act.  

A complaint from the bookshop sector  

The case had been brought before the courts following a criminal complaint filed in 2023 by Vision Presse, a trade association representing bookshops in Wallonia and Brussels. This organisation accused the National Lottery of adopting a strategy deemed harmful to bookshops.  

Behind the legal debate lay economic concerns as well. Vision Presse believed that the National Lottery was seeking to divert players away from bookshops by attracting them to its digital app. The Woohoo games, available only in digital format, were the focus of this criticism. For the bookshops represented by Vision Presse, the issue therefore went beyond the simple legal classification of a game. It touched on the distribution model, the role of physical retail outlets and the changing habits of players.   

Vision Presse also put forward a key argument: in its view, Woohoo games should be regarded as games of chance. Had this analysis been accepted, the National Lottery would have had to obtain a licence from the Gaming Commission in order to offer them legally.  

The player’s behaviour at the heart of the reasoning  

The court, however, took a different view. The decisive factor is the role of the player’s behaviour in the outcome of the game. According to the judgment, the player’s behaviour has no bearing on whether a prize is won, but only on the revelation of the result. It was this distinction that enabled the court to regard Woohoo games as online lottery games, and not as games of chance within the meaning of the contested law.  

In acquitting the National Lottery and Jannie Haek, the Brussels Criminal Court held that there could be no question of a breach of the law on games of chance. Breaches of this law can, however, result in significant financial penalties, with fines ranging from €26 to €120,000.  

In this case, this criminal threat therefore no longer applies to the acquitted defendants. The decision confirms that, in the court’s view, the National Lottery’s provision of Woohoo games did not fall under the licensing regime defended by Vision Presse. 

In its response, the National Lottery considers that the court has confirmed that, even when it organises and offers lottery games online, such as instant lottery games, it does not fall within the scope of the Gambling Act.   

Risks of addiction still highlighted  

The Constitutional Court has stated that online lottery games carry risks comparable to those of games of chance, particularly in terms of addiction. This statement, cited in the judgment of 29 May, significantly qualifies the scope of the debate.  

Recognising the status of online lotteries does not therefore mean dismissing concerns regarding the use of these games. Digital technology is changing access, the frequency of participation and the player’s experience.   

The National Lottery states that it has been organising its games for over 90 years within a responsible, controlled and transparent framework. It also states that it stands ready to assist the authorities in any legislative amendments aimed at strengthening player protection that is proportionate to the actual risk of the games and legally secure. The position expressed by the National Lottery is based on one idea: regulation must be based on the level of risk. This approach involves not treating all gaming products in the same way, but adapting the rules according to the risks they present, particularly online.  

What the ruling actually changes 

The ruling by the Brussels Criminal Court means that the National Lottery and its managing director have not been found guilty in the Woohoo case. It also confirms that these games, as examined, are considered to be online lottery games. The National Lottery has therefore not been found guilty of organising unlicensed games of chance. The court found that the outcome of the games was not influenced by the player’s behaviour.  

However, the ruling does not dispel the questions surrounding online games. The Constitutional Court’s reminder of comparable risks, particularly regarding addiction, suggests that the debate may now shift to the legislative and regulatory arena. The National Lottery itself says it is prepared to contribute to any potential legislative changes.