On 19 March 2025, the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (BVerwG), Germany’s highest administrative court, handed down a ruling that redefined the limits of the regulatory authorities’ action against unauthorised online gambling sites. The court ruled that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) cannot be forced to block access to such sites unless they are directly responsible for transmitting the content, in accordance with Article 9(1) of the State Treaty on Gambling 2021 (GlüStV 2021).
Background: a contested attempt to block
In October 2022, the Joint Gaming Authority of the Länder (GGL) ordered an ISP to block several gaming sites operating from Malta that were deemed illegal in Germany. The ISP challenged the order, arguing that it was not responsible for the content transmitted. The administrative courts of first instance and appeal ruled in favour of the ISP, a position now confirmed by the BVerwG.
A strict interpretation of the law
The BVerwG pointed out that Section 9(1) of GlüStV 2021 allows blocking measures to be imposed only on responsible service providers within the meaning of Section 8 of the former Telemedia Act (TMG). Although this law has been repealed, its provisions remain relevant for the interpretation of the treaty. According to the court, a provider is only liable if it initiates or selects the content transmitted, which was not the case here.
Implications for the regulation of online gambling
This decision considerably limits the GGL’s means of action against illegal gambling operators. No longer able to rely on ISPs to block access to sites, the authority will have to step up its efforts with the hosts of these sites. Since 2022, the GGL has already adopted a strategy focused on hosting providers, having succeeded in blocking or disabling more than 930 domains linked to unauthorised games.
Towards legislative reform?
Faced with these limitations, the GGL is calling for a revision of GlüStV 2021 to broaden its blocking powers, in particular by including advertising for illegal games. The authority also wants to simplify enforcement procedures by abolishing the requirement to take action against operators first before blocking measures can be imposed.
A welcome clarification for ISPs
For Internet service providers, this decision provides legal clarity on their obligations. It confirms that they cannot be held responsible for the content they transmit, unless they are directly involved. This distinction between different types of digital intermediaries could influence future regulatory discussions and enforcement approaches.