EU court has set a precedent on applying national law to disputes with unlicensed iGaming operators

The Court of Justice of the European Union has issued a decision that could have far-reaching consequences for online gambling operators working without local licenses. In a ruling delivered on 15 January in Case C-77/24, the Court confirmed that players may rely on the law of their home country when seeking compensation from foreign iGaming companies operating illegally in that market.

The judgment follows a request for clarification from Austria’s Supreme Court and focuses on how the EU’s Rome II Regulation applies to disputes arising from online gambling losses.

Austrian Player Challenges Maltese Operator

The case was brought by an Austrian resident who lost €18.5 thousand while gambling online between 2019 and 2020. The games were offered by brands linked to Titanium Brace Marketing, a Maltese-licensed company now in liquidation. Although licensed in Malta, the operator did not hold authorisation to offer online gambling services in Austria.

The player pursued legal action not only against the company itself but also against its two directors, arguing that Austrian law allows personal liability where illegal gambling services are offered domestically.

Directors Dispute Jurisdiction

The directors contested the claim, maintaining that any alleged damage occurred in Malta, where the company was established and where the player’s account was held. They also argued that Maltese law should apply, as it offers broader protections for company officers.

These arguments prompted Austria’s Supreme Court to seek guidance from the EU’s highest court on whether such claims fall under company law or tort law, and which country’s legislation should govern them.

Damage Occurs Where the Player Is

The Court of Justice sided with the player. It ruled that claims linked to losses from unlicensed online gambling fall under tort law rather than internal corporate matters. As a result, the Rome II Regulation applies.

According to the Court, the financial harm suffered by a player occurs in the country where that player lives and participates in online gambling. In this case, that country is Austria, meaning Austrian law should apply unless there is a clearly stronger connection to another jurisdiction.

Why the Decision Matters

The proceedings will now continue before the Austrian courts, which are expected to issue a final decision based on the EU court’s interpretation. Even so, the ruling is already being closely watched across the European gambling market.

In practical terms, it weakens a strategy long used by some online casinos — operating across borders while relying on licenses and legal protections in other jurisdictions. Company directors, including those holding nominal or offshore roles, may now face claims in countries where players actually reside.

For players, the ruling lowers legal barriers. Losses are no longer tied to the operator’s place of registration but to the player’s own location, making domestic courts and national law the primary route for seeking redress when gambling services are offered without a license.

Earlier, we reported on Curaçao’s recent regulatory changes, which introduced new rules for handling disputes between players and operators, strengthening oversight and formalising complaint resolution procedures.