European countries can freeze the assets of illegal casinos
•
26 May 2026 •
Reading time: 3 minutes
The Court of Justice of the European Union has handed down an important ruling for players seeking to recover money from online gambling operators. The ruling concerns a dispute between an Austrian player and the online casino Mr Green, centring on a debt of over €62,000.
An Austrian player facing a casino that refuses to pay
An Austrian player had obtained a final judgment ordering Mr Green to reimburse him over €62,000. The grounds for the ruling were that the casino had offered online gambling without a valid Austrian licence. Payment had not been made. The player therefore sought to use a European mechanism designed to prevent a debtor from making recovery impossible or very difficult: a European order for the provisional attachment of bank accounts.
This measure allows, in certain cases, for assets held in another European Union country to be temporarily frozen. It does not immediately transfer the money to the creditor, but aims to prevent it from disappearing before the decision is actually enforced.
The Court broadens the scope of judges’ discretion
The European ruling does not mean that online casino accounts can be frozen automatically. However, it does give national courts greater discretion. According to the judgment, judges may take broader factors into account when assessing the real risk that the player will be unable to recover the sums owed to them. In other words, the issue is not limited to whether the casino currently holds funds. It also concerns the risk that recovery may become difficult, or even impossible, due to the company’s conduct or the legal framework within which it operates.
The Court thus acknowledges that past conduct may be taken into account. It also accepts that judges may examine the existence of national legislation that could complicate the enforcement of foreign judgments, as the case explicitly referred to Law 55, a highly controversial Maltese law in disputes involving gaming operators. This legislation limits, in certain circumstances, the recognition of foreign judgments against Maltese online gambling companies.
A national court must always examine the specific circumstances of each case. However, if national legislation is likely to hinder or block the enforcement of a foreign judgment, this factor may be taken into account in the analysis.
A procedural victory for players
For players, this ruling provides an additional tool. It does not guarantee the immediate reimbursement of losses, but it can help secure a claim before it is too late.
In disputes against online casinos, time is often of the essence. A player may win their case in court, only to face difficulties in enforcement. Funds may be located in another country, pass through payment service providers, or be protected by complex legal arguments. The ability to seek a European preservation order more effectively therefore shifts the balance of power.
An opinion already announced by the Advocate General
The Court’s judgment follows on from an opinion previously delivered by Advocate General Maciej Szpunar. He had already held that judges could take into account legislation making it more difficult to recover debts.
The European ruling provides important clarification, but it does not resolve all uncertainties. Players will still need to convince a judge that there is a real risk to the recovery of their debt. Operators, for their part, will still be able to challenge requests to freeze assets.