.svg)
A German regional court has reportedly struck down two litigation-funded player claims at the same moment as a key instigator confirms a renewed push in the Netherlands, adding more texture to this complex international saga.
According to industry lawyers, the Higher District Court of Zweibrücken has rejected a gambler’s attempts to reclaim money lost to grey market operators in the years before Germany’s current licensing system.
The decision, which has yet to be published, would mark a rare but not unprecedented win for the industry in Germany, as it continues to fight a series of court battles against former customers or firms that have purchased their claims.
In a decision on February 26, the court upheld a ruling from the district court of first instance which had dismissed the case as inadmissible, according to a statement from Alicia Pointner of MELCHERS law firm.
A key point in the case was whether German courts have jurisdiction to rule on these kinds of player claims. The judge agreed with arguments that the gambling had taken place in Malta, where the operator in question was licensed, Pointner said.
The higher regional court is the most senior court in the German state of Rhineland-Palatinate. Any appeal of the ruling would move to Germany’s Federal Court of Justice.
“This could make it considerably more difficult for players to enforce their assigned claims in German courts in the future,” said Pointner.
“Players who have relied on German courts in the past must now be prepared for the possibility that their debt buyer may have to bring their claims before Maltese or Gibraltar courts in the future — a process that may in many cases involve additional hurdles.”
Malta has already signalled its ability to stymie claims brought against the operators it licenses.
A pair of rulings in February rejected the transfer of judgments from Austria that had ordered gambling firms to pay back all losses accrued in the Austrian grey market to two customers.
This legal shield is the result of amendments to Malta’s gambling act that began life as the controversial Bill 55.
Earlier this month, the European Commission confirmed to Vixio that it is still investigating Malta’s move to block the transfer of judgments from other EU member states.
Dutch Problems Just Beginning
Having already confirmed his status as a bête noire of the Austrian and German gambling industries, Stefan Bohar of the litigation financing firm AdvoFin says he has a cluster of claims heading for trial in the Netherlands.
The firm is partnering with lawyer Benzi Loonstein, who has already won landmark cases against Entain and Flutter.
Prominent European operator Unibet was also on the receiving end of a major player claim case last week; however, it has emerged that the former operating company behind the brand was sold by Kindred around the time it was acquired by French giant FDJ.
Exactly who owns the company now has not been disclosed, although several signs point to a Malta-based company.
Bohar and others are expected to file several more lawsuits against Unibet and Trannel.
“From my understanding, Dutch law gives us a multitude of ‘hooks’ to pierce the corporate veil and go after the owners of a brand and/or company,” Bohar told Vixio.
For now, AdvoFin is focused on bringing a series of individual claims to the Dutch courts.
“With this approach, we have already acquired a portfolio that is rivaling the one we have been able to acquire in Germany,” he said.
