Gambling case law

Online gambling regulation in EU countries is characterised by diverse regulatory frameworks. In a number of judgments, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has ruled on the compliance of national regulatory frameworks with EU law.

Legal overview

All national regulatory systems must respect EU law. In a series of judgments, the CJEU has provided general guidance on the interpretation of the fundamental freedoms of the Internal Market in the area of online gambling so that national courts can assess the circumstances under which restrictive national gambling laws are justified on grounds related to the general interest.

The CJEU has confirmed that the provision and use of cross-border gambling services constitutes an economic activity that falls within the scope of the fundamental freedoms of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). In particular, Article 56 TFEU prohibits restrictions on the freedom to provide services to recipients in other EU countries. Nevertheless, there is no obligation of mutual recognition of authorisations or licenses to provide gambling services granted by an authority in an EU country.

The CJEU has also repeatedly recognised EU countries’ rights to restrict the cross-border supply of certain gambling services where necessary to protect public interest objectives such as the protection of minors, the fight against gambling addiction, and the prevention of crime and fraud.

While EU countries usually offer legitimate reasons for the restriction of cross-border gambling services, they must nonetheless demonstrate the suitability, proportionality and necessity of the measure in question, in particular the existence of a problem linked to the public interest objective at stake and the consistency of the regulatory system.

EU countries must also demonstrate that the public interest objectives they have chosen are being pursued in a consistent and systematic manner, and they must not undertake, facilitate, or tolerate measures that would run counter to the achievement of these objectives.

Court cases

Judgment	Case	Reference
Judgment of 28/02/2018	Sporting Odds - C-3/17	EU:C:2018:130
Judgment of 20/12/2017	Global Starnet - C-322/16	EU:C:2017:985
Judgment of 14/06/2017	Online Games and Others - C-685/15	EU:C:2017:452
Judgment of 22/06/2017	Unibet International Ltd - Case C-49/16	EU:C:2017:491
Judgment of 13/06/2017	GBGA - Case C - 591/15	EU:C:2017:449
Judgment of 08/09/2016	Politanò - C-225/15	EU:C:2016:645
Judgment of 30/06/2016	Admiral Casinos - C-464/15	EU:C:2016:500
Judgment of 04/02/2016	Sebat Ince - Case C-336/14	EU:C:2016:72
Judgement of 22/01/2015	Stanleybet International Betting Ltd – C-463/13	EU:C:2015:25
Judgement of 26/09/2014	Dansk Automat Brancheforening – T-601/11	EU:T:2014:839
Judgement of 12/06/2014	Digibet and Albers - C-156/13	EU:C:2014:1756
Judgement of 30/04/2014	Pfleger & Others – C-390/12	EU:C:2014:281
Judgement of 12/09/2013	Biasci & others – C-660/11 & C-8/12	EU:C:2013:550
Judgement of 24/01/2013	Stanleybet and Others - C-186/11	EU:C:2013:33
Judgment of 19/07/2012	SIA Garkalns – C-470/11	EU:C:2012:505
Judgment of 12/07/2012	HIT and HIT LARIX – C-176/11	EU:C:2012:454
Judgement of 16/02/2012	Pulignani – C-413/10	EU:C:2012:87
Judgment of 16/02/2012	Costa and Cifone – C-72/10 & C-77/10	EU:C:2012:80
Judgment of 15/09/2011	Dickinger and Ömer – C-347/09	EU:C:2011:582
Judgment of 30/06/2011	Zeturf – C-212/08	EU:C:2011:437
Judgment of 09/09/2010	Engelmann – C-64/08	EU:C:2010:506
Judgment of 08/09/2010	Carmen Media Group – C-46/08	EU:C:2010:505
Judgment of 08/09/2010	Stoß & Others – C-316/07 etc.	EU:C:2010:504
Judgment of 08/09/2010	Winner Wetten – C-409/06	EU:C:2010:503
Judgment of 08/07/2010	Sjöberg & Gerdin – C-447 & C-448/08	EU:C:2010:415
Judgment of 03/06/2010	Ladbrokes Betting & Gaming and Ladbrokes International – Case C-258/08	EU:C:2010:308
Judgment of 03/06/2010	Sporting Exchange & Others (Betfair) – C-203/08	EU:C:2010:307
Judgment of 08/09/2009	Liga Portuguesa de Futebol Profissional &Bwin International (Santa Casa) – C-42/07	EU:C:2009:519
Judgment of 06/03/2007	Placanica & Others – C-338/04 – C-359/04 &C-360/04	EU:C:2007:133
Judgment of 13/11/2003	Lindman – C-42/02	EU:C:2003:613
Judgment of 06/11/2003	Gambelli & Others – C-243/01	EU:C:2003:597
Judgment of 11/09/2003	Anomar & Others – C-6/01	EU:C:2003:446
Judgment of 21/10/1999	Zenatti – C-67/98	EU:C:1999:514
Judgment of 21/09/1999	Läärä & Others – C-124/97	EU:C:1999:435
Judgment of 24/03/1994	Schindler – C-275/92	EU:C:1994:119

EFTA court rulings

Judgment	Case	Reference
Judgment of 29/08/2014	Casino Admiral AG v Wolfgang Egger – Case E-24/13	EFTA Court Report 2014, p.732
Judgment of 30/05/2007	Ladbrokes Ltd. v The Government of Norway, Ministry of Culture and Church Affairs and Ministry of Agriculture and Food (Ladbrokes) – Case E-3/06	EFTA Court Report 2007, p.89
Judgment of 14/03/2007	EFTA Surveillance Authority v The Kingdom of Norway (gaming machines) – Case E-1/06	EFTA Court Report 2007, p.11