The EU upholds national sanctions
•
18 Apr 2026 •
Reading time: 3 minutes
The Court of Justice of the European Union confirms that each Member State remains free to regulate gambling within its territory. This ruling clarifies the status of foreign licences.
A decision that reshuffles the deck
The Court of Justice of the European Union has handed down a landmark ruling in the Lotto case (C-440/23). This judgment, eagerly awaited by stakeholders in the online gambling sector, clarifies a key point: Member States retain broad autonomy to regulate games of chance within their territory. Each Member State is free to determine which forms of gambling it authorises, and under what conditions. This freedom includes the possibility of banning certain offerings or imposing strict rules on operators.
This means that a licence obtained in a country such as Malta does not automatically grant the right to operate elsewhere in the European Union. An online casino must comply with the national rules of the country where it wishes to offer its services.
This clarification puts an end to an ambiguity often exploited by certain players in the sector.
The end of a key argument for casinos
For years, many online gambling operators have relied on licences obtained in another Member State – often Malta – to justify their presence in markets where they were not officially authorised. This argument has now been clearly rejected by the Court of Justice of the European Union.
The highest courts in Germany and Austria had already adopted a similar position. However, the European ruling gives this interpretation a much broader scope, making it applicable across the entire Union. The Court states that Member States may impose civil consequences for the illegal provision of gambling services.
European law does not prevent players from claiming reimbursement for losses incurred with unauthorised operators. This applies in particular to players who placed bets on platforms such as Unibet or PokerStars before 2021, at a time when these companies did not yet hold the necessary licences in certain countries and regulatory oversight was lacking.
Towards a wave of litigation?
The Court’s decision could encourage many players to bring proceedings to recover their losses. For the operators concerned, the financial stakes could be considerable. However, the practical implementation of these refunds will depend on national courts.
In the Netherlands, for example, the Supreme Court is expected to rule on this matter shortly. This decision is eagerly awaited, as it could establish a clear framework for claims for reimbursement.
Better safe than sorry
Beyond potential disputes, the CJEU’s ruling also aims to deter illegal practices. By allowing Member States to impose civil penalties, the Court reinforces the idea that the illegal provision of gambling services must not be profitable. This principle is essential to ensuring the effectiveness of national regulations.
National courts will now have to interpret and apply these principles in specific cases.