ECJ ruling provides new context to the loss recovery conundrum

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) today stayed a motion against online casino operator Mr Green, taking new considerations of the debtor's previous conduct into account and referring the case to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling.  

Indeed, case C-198/24 has seen an Austrian player seek to recover €62,878 ($72,892) in losses from Mr Green accrued within Austrian state borders between January 2017 – April 2019. The online gambling operator was deemed to have offered its games to Austrian players, despite only holding a Maltese licence for online gambling.  

As such, the plaintiff (or player) outlined that, since the operator did not hold a licence under federal law of the jurisdiction in which it was offering its products, the underlying contract between the pair was null and void, requiring the company to refund all stakes placed. In 2021, a Regional Court for Civil Matters in the Austrian capital of Vienna upheld this claim, with Mr Green’s appeals being dismissed by a Higher Regional Court in Vienna in 2022. 

However, in early 2024, a District Court of Vienna dismissed the case as the player had not pursued the case further regarding the reclaiming of funds, despite having been given the instruments to do so three years prior. The court ruled that the funds must therefore not be pertinent to the integrity or preservation of the player’s bank accounts or wellbeing.  

Subsequently, the player appealed this decision on numerous grounds and, interestingly, the appeal was granted due to two specific and newly unearthed factors – among other considerations.  

The first factor outlined that Mr Green had terminated its contract with its Austrian payment provider while the case was ongoing, a move which the court interpreted to be potentially intentionally evasive. Secondly, the laws of the operator’s country of residence – in this case, Malta – were also taken into consideration. Specifically, within this context, Maltese laws that prohibit foreign entities from imposing judgements on operators licensed within Malta. 

These two contextual factors of consideration provide a crucial backdrop of information in the long-standing debate around player losses recovery, particularly cases against unlicensed operators. Broadly, this latest ruling implies that any court presiding over similar cases must take into account previous actions of both the alleged debtor and potential creditor – alongside any potential structural obstacles to regulatory enforcement.