Malta court blocks Austrian player claim enforcement
Table of contents
- Malta’s First Hall of the Civil Court ruled on 27 February 2025 that Austrian judgments ordering MGA-licensed operators to refund player losses are contrary to Maltese public policy.
- The court cited Article 56 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 56A of Malta’s Gaming Act as grounds for refusing enforcement under Article 45(1)(a) of the Brussels I Recast Regulation.
- Austria’s exclusive online gambling licence is due for renewal in 2027, raising the prospect of market liberalisation that could reduce the volume of future player claims.
Malta’s civil court has ruled against recognising Austrian judgments that ordered MGA-licensed operators to repay gambling losses, in a decision that marks a significant test for cross-border gaming regulation across the European Union.
In two decisions delivered by Judge Francesco Depasquale on 27 February 2025, in cases involving TSG Interactive and European Lotto and Betting, Malta’s First Hall of the Civil Court denied the recognition and enforcement of judgments obtained by Austrian players seeking recovery of gambling losses from MGA-licensed operators.
The court found that enforcing the Austrian rulings would be manifestly contrary to Maltese public policy under Article 45(1)(a) of EU Regulation 1215/2012, better known as the Brussels I Recast Regulation.
Background to the claims
Austrian and German courts have heard a growing number of player loss claims, with consumers seeking to recover losses from offshore operators deemed to have been operating illegally in their domestic markets. Many of the operators targeted hold valid licences issued by the Malta Gaming Authority.
A key argument advanced before the Maltese court was that Austria’s online gambling monopoly, operated by Casinos Austria through Win2Day, breaches Article 56 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which guarantees the freedom to provide services across member states.
A second argument relied on Article 56A of Malta’s Gaming Act, introduced through Bill 55. The provision was specifically designed to strengthen Maltese protections against foreign judgments where those decisions conflict with the legality of services provided under an MGA licence.
The court held that recognising the Austrian rulings would effectively treat MGA-licensed operators as acting unlawfully in Austria, thereby undermining the validity of their Maltese licences. Player representatives in Austria and Germany, however, continue to argue that such refusals weaken EU consumers’ ability to recover losses from cross-border operators.
In a subsequent related case in January 2026, Judge Depasquale again sided with an MGA operator, refusing to enforce an Austrian judgment ordering Betway to repay approximately €83,000 in gambling losses. The court held that enforcement would conflict with Maltese public policy and Article 56 TFEU, noting that Betway’s MGA licence conferred rights to operate cross-border within the EU.
Austria’s monopoly under pressure
The Austrian framework underpinning these claims is itself approaching a major turning point. Key concessions within Austria’s current gambling system, including the exclusive online casino licence held by Win2Day and six of the country’s twelve land-based casino licences, are due for renewal in 2027.
Austria’s Ministry of Finance is preparing draft legislation that will form the basis of the next licensing tender. The reforms are expected to introduce uniform player protection standards across online and land-based gambling, age-based loss limits, and an independent gambling regulator.
Senior government officials have indicated support for a more open licensing framework, particularly with the Win2Day licence approaching expiry. Simon Priglinger-Simader, President of the Austrian Online Gambling Association (OVWG), has suggested clarity on the future structure could arrive in the near term.
Industry stakeholders have intensified calls for reform. Monika Racek, CEO of Austrian operator Admiral, has argued that the monopoly is driving consumers toward unregulated alternatives, where player protections are absent, and has called for a sustainable competitive framework featuring multiple licensed operators.
EU pressure mounts on Malta
Malta’s courtroom victories have not gone unnoticed in Brussels. On 18 June 2025, the European Commission launched infringement proceedings against Malta, alleging that Article 56A may be incompatible with EU Regulation 1215/2012 by enabling Maltese courts to systematically refuse enforcement of foreign judgments against MGA-licensed operators.
In a parallel line of case law, the Court of Justice of the European Union has held that Austrian players may pursue damages claims under Austrian law where losses were incurred in Austria. The Malta Gaming Authority described that ruling as important, while maintaining that existing legal defences, including Article 56A, remain available.
For the broader iGaming industry, the implications are substantial. If Austria adopts an open licensing framework by 2027, the legal basis for many player recovery claims could weaken significantly. In the meantime, the outcome of the European Commission’s infringement action will determine whether Article 56A remains an effective shield for Malta-licensed operators.
Keep reading
Do you have a story worth sharing?
Send it over to our editors!
