Gambling corporation awards Wiener 2.5 million euros.
In 2022, a court in Vienna Neustadt dealt with the case, "Gambling Addict vs. Novomatic". The accuser had lost a significant amount of money on Novomatic Group's gaming machines for over a decade. The court judgment didn't favor the Novomatic Group, meaning they must return around 2.5 million euros to the plaintiff. The plaintiff had lost 2 million previously and is set to receive close to 500 thousand more from Novomatic Gaming Industries GmbH. However, the company has since appealed the decision.
From 2002 to 2012, the plaintiff lost 2.5 million euros on Novomatic Group's gaming machines. The psychiatric-neurological report confirmed the player's severe compulsion to gamble. Owing to their gambling activities, the plaintiff had limited legal capacity. Consequently, the wagers they placed must be returned. This includes 500 thousand euros in interest.
The court also declared the Novomatic Group had breached the Gaming Act. The expert noted that the plaintiff predominantly played "dice games", "action games", and "gambling", spending too much money per game and previously setting unnecessarily high stakes. This breached the minimum limits, ultimately representing a violation of the Austrian government's monopoly on gambling. The Novomatic Group is currently contesting the verdict. It remains to be seen if the slot machine conglomerate will come out victorious.
Has Gambling Addiction become a serious concern?
This lawsuit is a significant illustration of the consequences of gambling addiction. Up to 2015, slots could be found in bars across the country. Subsequently, these machines are only permitted in Vienna casinos. Development in this regard is welcome, as inviting scenarios for gambling addicts are scarce. However, in casinos, players are monitored, and their addiction cannot as easily lead to license-holders' coffers overflowing. This is presumably plausible, as casinos undoubtedly recognize regular players, allowing for more tailored interactions or offering help.
Do gambling companies have a responsibility?
Over the years, several court cases have seen large gambling operators lose. Frequently, it would seem the lawyers were aware of which expert to employ for their gambling-addicted clients. This is hardly surprising, considering the high incidence of gambling addicts. Numerous regional initiatives, though, work tirelessly to provide support and information. Hence, the question arises as to why the companies don't intervene beforehand and exclude such players from the machines. Many court cases involving players possessing expert opinions of "partial legal capacity" are no rarity.
In essence, the player is entitled to the money they left on the gaming machines. A potential counterargument might involve identifying each player via customer cards or fingerprints. Since such measures are already feasible in online banking, they may help prevent gambling addiction by restricting access. Why are the companies hesitant to implement these measures?
Read also:
- The 15-year-old murderer admits to fatally shooting Francesco, who was 14.
- Schalke's pressure has affected Terodde.
- Columbia University Faces Possible Expulsion Following Demonstrations
- Football turmoil in Munich: Last-minute penalty stuns Bayern
Source: www.onlinecasinosdeutschland.com
