Gambling Disputes Escalate Between Malta and EU Nations
Maltese Court Decides Against Compensating Austrian Gamblers for Their Losses
Updated on: 29.04.2025 By: Timm Schaffner, Edited by: Angela Burke
Recent court rulings have ignited a contentious battle between the gambling hub of Malta and EU countries with strict gambling regulations, such as Austria and Germany. This dispute centers around the legal enforcement of judgments against online casinos licensed in Malta by EU courts.
The Battle of the Courts: Malta vs. Austria
The most recent developments were highlighted in a Maltese court ruling made on February 27, 2025. This ruling protects gambling providers from enforcement originating from Austria [Symbol image]. Specifically, the ruling concerns an Austrian player who lost about 38,325 euros at Lottoland, a gambling provider licensed in Malta [Article in English].
Despite the player receiving the money back through an Austrian court, the Maltese court refused to enforce this judgment. The Maltese judges based their decision on various arguments, including the fact that gambling providers in Malta operate legally within Maltese law and that enforcement would contradict the public order of Malta.
Moreover, the judges argued that Austrian gambling regulation restricts the free movement of services within the EU. They questioned whether Austria is acting in accordance with EU law given its controversial gambling monopoly.
A Potential Boost for Litigation Funder Businesses?
In the past, out-of-court settlements reached between casino and sports betting providers and litigation funders have helped stave off court rulings from higher courts like the Bundesgerichtshof (BGH) or EuropΓ€ische Gerichtshof (EuGH).
However, the current situation presents a unique opportunity for litigation funders. The games rights litigation funder Gamesright has filed a case against the Malta-licensed sports betting provider Tipico, which is currently pending before the EuGH. This case promises to set a landmark judgment.
Until the EuGH decision, it appears that ongoing proceedings will be suspended. If litigation funders can successfully enforce judgments against operators licensed in Malta, they may stand to benefit financially due to the liquidity problems that Maltese jurisprudence could cause for these companies.
The Controversial Protection Law Bill No. 55
In 2023, Malta enacted legislation known as Bill No. 55, which allows its courts to refuse the enforcement of foreign judgments against operators licensed by the Malta Gaming Authority (MGA). This legislation has often been criticized for undermining judicial cooperation and the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU) [3][4].
With the recent escalation of legal disputes, stakeholders are eagerly awaiting the ECJ's ruling, which will determine whether member states must recognize judgments against operators licensed in other EU jurisdictions. A pro-Malta ruling could have far-reaching implications for the gambling industry, potentially inspiring similar legislative efforts in other gaming jurisdictions.
The combined value of pending claims in Germany and Austria exceeds β¬1 billion [4]. A favorable ruling for Malta would effectively void these claims, depriving litigation funders of anticipated returns [2][5]. Furthermore, the financial exposure of companies like RightNow, which may be on the brink of bankruptcy due to lengthy judgment proceedings, highlights the seriousness of the situation.
The legal disputes between Malta, Austria, and the EU will continue to unfold in the coming months. In both cases, the ECJ will have to issue a landmark ruling on whether the freedom to provide services applies in Austria's gambling sector and whether Bill No. 55 violates EU law.
- What's at stake in the ongoing legal battle between Malta and EU nations, notably Austria, is the enforcement of judgments against online casinos licensed in Malta by EU courts. governing bodies. As recently demonstrated in a Maltese court ruling on February 27, 2025, Maltese courts are resisting the enforcement of judgments originating from Austria, which has led to further escalation of the dispute.
- The Maltese court ruling on February 27, 2025, protects gambling providers licensed in Malta from enforcement actions from Austria, such as the one involving Lottoland, a Malta-licensed gambling provider that lost about 38,325 euros to an Austrian player. The Maltese court's decision to refuse the enforcement of this judgment has sparked arguments about the contradiction between Maltese law and the public order of Malta, as well as the controversial gambling monopoly in Austria.
- The current situation presents an opportunity for litigation funders like Gamesright, which has filed a case against Tipico, a Malta-licensed sports betting provider, currently pending before the EuGH. A favorable ruling for Malta could have significant implications for the gambling industry, potentially inspiring similar legislative efforts in other gaming jurisdictions, and depriving litigation funders of anticipated returns on claims worth over β¬1 billion in Germany and Austria.
