.svg)
Two court decisions in Malta described as "landmark" by gambling industry lawyers have blocked Austrian player refund judgments on public policy grounds, but the team behind the claims say the fight is far from over.
A pair of cases before the Maltese Superior Court ended in favour of TSG Interactive Gaming Europe and European Lotto and Betting Ltd on Thursday (February 27).
A judge ruled that refunding players for their grey market losses in Austria would violate Malta's public policy, even if ignoring a judgment from a fellow EU member state appeared to breach union regulations.
TSG is the operating unit of online poker giant PokerStars, which is now owned by US-listed Flutter. European Lotto and Betting is the licence holder in Malta for the Lottoland brand.
“This decision has significant implications for the gambling industry, reinforcing the autonomy of Maltese regulatory authorities and the jurisdiction of Maltese courts over gambling-related matters,” said Davinia Cutajar and Jonathan Muscat from law firm WH Partners, who represented the two companies.
A spokesperson for the litigation funding firm that backed the consumer cases said the ruling would be appealed and that the outcome was “just what we expected”.
Attempts by gamblers in Austria, Germany, the Netherlands and more to recoup their losses from offshore operators have threatened to run to hundreds of millions of euros.
Backed by litigation funding companies, player claims have been wending their way through European courts, with judges largely ruling in favour of consumers. Especially in Austria, where a Supreme Court judgment made it a formality for players to win cases against online casino operators.
Retreating to their headquarters in Malta, gambling firms have instead demanded that cases be heard in the country where they are incorporated.
In the meantime, Malta introduced Bill 55, which, once it had passed into law, amended the country’s gambling act to effectively block foreign court judgments against Malta-licensed gambling companies on public order grounds.
Against this backdrop, Stefan Bohar of Austrian litigation funding firm AdvoFin said the latest ruling was “right in tone with everything that has been going on in Malta in terms of Bill 55 and the actions of the Maltese operators and/or the MGA (Maltese Gaming Authority)”.
AdvoFin, he said, was financing both of the player claims in these cases.
“This is not a dead end,” he pledged, promising that an appeal of the ruling was incoming and that his firm would be in contact with the European Commission to inform them of the rulings.
The European Commission opened an investigation into Bill 55 in 2023, following complaints that it violated EU laws.
Since then, hints of progress from the commission have been thin on the ground. The European Commission did not respond to a request for comment on this story.
Bohar also pointed to two cases in Austria that were referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) last year, the rulings of which are expected to exert a significant influence on the player refund saga.
“We are convinced that the [CJEU] will set a clear statement in terms of the enforceability of such judgments,” he said.
Bohar also hinted at fresh legal tactics, cryptically warning: “Don’t ever forget, there are also other entities and/or individuals who can be pursued based on the illegal offering in Austria.”
Although he did not elaborate, both industry executives and lawyers representing players have previously spoken of possible legal cases against company leadership, designed to force gambling firms to settle outstanding cases.
The gambling industry in Malta meanwhile greeted the judgments with adulation.
“It’s a message that Malta is still a robust, reliable jurisdiction in the European iGaming sector,” said one user on LinkedIn. “The MGA is still a strong licence and this is testament to that,” added another.
