EU Court to Decide if German Bettors Can Claim Millions in Unlicensed Bets

To solve the issue of whether German bettors can claim back their losses from operators like Tipico, who operated without valid licenses between 2012 and 2020, the German Federal Court of Justice, Bundesgerichtshofs (BGH), has referred a case involving historic losses from online sports betting to the European Court of Justice (ECJ), thereby causing a significant delay, reported Tagesspiegel. Many gamblers have approached German courts seeking compensation for their lost bets, arguing that they were void because there was no proper license.

German Court’s Delayed Decision Leaves Online Betting Firms in the Dark

The center of the dispute is that betting operators applied for German licenses during this time including Tipico but got stuck in a bureaucratic maze which led to no licenses being given out for many years. However, these firms continued providing their services under licenses granted by other EU countries such as Malta. According to German law if these companies did not have the required German licenses then German players who lost money during this period should be refunded.

The BGH, while leaning towards the view that these contracts are indeed void, has decided to seek clarification from the ECJ on whether the lack of a German license, due to the flawed licensing process, negates the applicability of European law which allows the free movement of services within the EU. This European legal principle complicates the matter, as it could potentially validate the operators’ actions if it is determined that the licensing issues were beyond their control and thus not a valid reason to void the contracts.

Operators Hope for ECJ Favor as Bettors Pursue Refunds

This wait is not surprising for many affected customers, represented by lawyers including Jannis Staudt and Claus Goldenstein. They advise clients to continue pursuing their claims to prevent them from expiring, as legal claims for such losses typically have a ten-year limitation period. They argue that, historically, European courts have favored consumer protection, and they expect a similar outcome in this case.

However, Tipico and other operators see hope in the BGH handing over the case to the ECJ and believe the court would decide against the refunds. This would align with a previous decision that found the German licensing process to be in violation of EU law. The operators argue that since the licensing process was flawed, it should not be held against them.

The ruling by the ECJ is eagerly awaited as it will help shape judgments on many more comparable cases throughout Europe. If the ECJ rules in favor of the players, it could trigger a wave of claims and potentially result in operators having to refund millions of euros in losses. Conversely, a ruling in favor of the operators would solidify the legality of their operations during the licensing void and potentially limit their financial liabilities.