Bank Customer in Austria Pursuing Return of Gaming Losses from Financial Institution
Unscrupulous Gambles: Fight for a Refund in a Legal Loophole
An Austrian Gambler Battles for a €27,000 Prize in an Unlawful Online CasinoMalta's Law Protects the Casino, Yet the Supreme Court Offers a New HopeThreatening a Bank with Legal Action: A Fresh Strategy to Recover Stolen Winnings
A Compelling Gamble Gone Awry: Losing Big in an Illegal Online Casino
In the heart of Austria, an unlucky player, according to Der Standard, has gambled €27,000 at a shady online casino secretly operating in Austria – a fact that's quite obvious to the observer.
Despite the casino's unlawful activities, many similar establishments shelter themselves under Maltese legislation, immune to foreign prosecutions due to Bill No. 55 – a controversial law that's been under the EU Commission's investigation for nearly two years.
Under this law, Maltese online casinos evade the responsibility of returning losses from illicit business, which is a frustrating reality for those who've lost fortunes.
Channeling the Anger: Going after the Bank
In an unprecedented move, the Austrian Supreme Court ruled in December 2024 (case number 3 Nc 72/24d) that players could enforce the refund in their home country, even though the online casino operator seems unresponsive.
However, instead of targeting the casino, the player is now trying a different approach: the third-party liability claim. They're gunning for the bank that keeps the gambling company's cash. The bank has yet to comply voluntarily with the player's requests.
The sly play relies on the principle that companies indirectly involved in illegal affairs can be held accountable. Lawyers in Germany are also adopting this tactic.
Projected Confusion within the EU: The Battle for the Freedom to Provide Services
On April 9, 2025, the European Court of Justice was anticipated to decide whether foreign online casinos, without a national license, could operate legally within EU borders relying on the Freedom to Provide Services under Article 56 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).
Although the verdict initially concerned Germany, its implications would extend across the entire EU. The court would determine whether national gambling regulations trump the framework given by the Freedom to Provide Services.
The verdict is expected on July 10, 2025. However, its relevance to the past and the future remains uncertain.
Years in Limbo: A Tangled Legal Maze
If the bank lawsuit crumbles or the reimbursement gets delayed, the player intends to claim their winnings from the European Central Bank (ECB). However, whether this would speed up the process or create more challenges is still debatable among experts.
Regardless, the process could stretch for years, as the case might set a significant precedent requiring careful preparation. Given that such cases in Austria expire only after 30 years, there seems to be no urgency in delivering a verdict.
Still, the player has enlisted the help of Jufina, a litigation funder, who may have already facilitated some compensation for the player.
Expanding Context: Malta's Complicated Relationship with Third-Party Liability Claims Against Banks
In Malta, the application of third-party liability claims against banks involves intricate factors, such as the country's legal framework and recent laws like Bill No. 55 that could indirectly impact banking activities. Bill No. 55 allows Maltese courts to reject foreign judgments that contradict Malta's public policy or jeopardize national interests.
This legislation could potentially shield banks from consequences arising from their indirect involvement in illegal activities. However, the legality of these practices and the validity of third-party claims remain a complex issue stemming from the broader implications of Bill No. 55.
The European Court of Justice's upcoming ruling might shed more light on the compatibility between Malta's legislation and EU law, potentially reshaping the landscape for banks and other entities involved in gambling activities within Malta.
The gambler, facing a lengthy legal battle, questions about the future course of action: "What about targeting the bank? With the casino unresponsive, could a third-party liability claim against the bank be successful?"
In the midst of a tumultuous legal battle, the gambler considers casino-and-gambling games of a different sort, as they also ponder the potential of casino-games in the financial world: "Could this new strategy, involving the bank that keeps the casino's cash, offer a more promising avenue for recovery?"
