The Advertising Standards Authority (‘ASA’) ruled on 23 August 2017 in favour of Bear Group relating to two claims of potential breaches of the Broadcast Committee of Advertising Practice (‘BCAP’) Code, specifically Rules 17.4.5 and 32.2.2, two rules that focus on advertising to underage audiences. Anna Mathias of Woods Whur analyses the ASA’s decision in this case in the context of the ongoing attention being paid to gambling advertising in the UK. / read more

On 9 November 2017, the Belgian Constitutional Court ruled, in response to three joined cases referred to it by the Council of State¹, that the Belgian Gaming Act violates the Constitution insofar as it allows the accumulation of the exploitation of several supplementary licences of different classes through one and the same domain name and the URLs linked to it. Patrick Van Eecke and Kaat Scheerlinck of DLA Piper provide detailed analysis of the three joined cases, the Court’s decision, and the implications of the decision for the Belgian Gaming Commission’s licensing process and the Belgian gambling sector in general. / read more

The UK’s Supreme Court recently ruled in the case of Ivey v. Crockfords that the poker player Phil Ivey cheated while playing punto banco in the Crockfords Club casino in London. The Supreme Court decision provides guidance on the kind of conduct that, at least in the UK, will constitute ‘cheating’ in the context of gambling, and the relevance of dishonesty in determining this. The Court’s decision also has implications for what will be considered cheating in online gambling in particular. Simon Wallis of Joelson discusses the facts of the case, before exploring what the decision means for online gambling, through the use of a number of examples specific to the remote gambling context. / read more

The German Federal Administrative Court ruled on 26 October 2017 that the ban on online casino, scratchcard and poker games under Germany’s Interstate Treaty on Gambling 2012 (‘Interstate Treaty’) is compliant with constitutional and EU law, according to the Court’s press release; the full legal grounds of the judgment have yet to be released. / read more

The Court of Justice of the European Union (‘CJEU’) has ruled that Hungary’s licensing framework for online gambling placed overly restrictive and unfair conditions on operators from other EU countries looking to enter the market, in a dispute between operator Unibet and Hungary’s gambling regulator, the Central National Treasury and Customs Authority. In particular, the CJEU found that Hungary’s licensing regime was not compatible with Article 56 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’), which prevents EU Member States from disrupting cross-border trade and services. Dr Márton Domokos, Senior Counsel at CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP, explains the details of the case and the CJEU’s decision, and outlines the ways in which the verdict could influence the Hungarian gambling regime going forward. / read more

The Court of Justice of the European Union (‘CJEU’) ruled on 22 January 2015 in Case C-463/13 that EU law does not preclude the organisation in Italy of a new call for tender for the awarding of gambling and betting licences whose period of validity is shorter than that of licences awarded previously. Italian legislation provides that participation in the organising of betting and gambling, including the collection of bets, is subject to possession of a licence and police authorisation. In 1999, publicly-traded limited liability companies were excluded from tendering procedures for the awarding of licences. The CJEU declared that the exclusion of those companies was incompatible with EU law (Case C-338/04). / read more

The CJEU ruled on 22 January in Case C-463/13 that EU law does not preclude Italy from awarding gambling and betting licences whose period of validity is shorter than that of licences awarded previously. Stanley International Betting and subsidiary Stanleybet challenged the 2012 tender, claiming that shorter and more restrictive licences blocked them from participating in Italy’s gambling market. / read more

The CJEU ruled on 12 June that the existence of two regulatory frameworks is not a violation of EU market freedoms, provided that the more restrictive legislation satisfies ‘the conditions of proportionality,’ following a request from Germany’s Federal Court during the lawsuit between Digibet and Westlotto. / read more

The Federal District Court of New Jersey issued on 28 February a permanent injunction against a New Jersey law which allowed wagers on sports betting, ruling it in violation of the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA), in a case brought by four major sports leagues, supported by the US Department of Justice. / read more

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled on 24 January that OPAP’s gambling monopoly in Greece violates EU law and that Greek authorities must reform OPAP or liberalise the market. / read more