Illegal online gambling: Law firm Cocron files new lawsuits against payment service providers
Those who have deposited money into an illegal online casino often first think about possible claims against the casino operator itself. In practice, however, it is becoming increasingly clear that payment processing also needs to be subjected to intensive legal scrutiny. This is precisely where the new procedures of the law firm Cocron come into play.
After more than a year of extensive research, analysis of payment flows and technical preparation, the law firm has today filed several lawsuits against various financial service providers and payment processors. The accusation is that these companies continued to process payments for illegal online gambling providers despite the stricter legal requirements in Germany over the years.
What exactly is this about?
The focus is on the suspicion that certain payment service providers did not simply execute ordinary payment orders. Rather, previous investigations suggest that player deposits were deliberately routed through intermediary systems, wallet solutions, or crypto service providers to conceal the actual use of the funds.
This is usually hardly noticeable to consumers. From the outside, the payment process often appears reputable, fast and technically unobtrusive.
This is precisely what makes the situation particularly sensitive from a legal perspective. Because according to the State Treaty on Gambling 2021, not only is illegal gambling itself prohibited. Participating in payments related to illegal gambling is also prohibited by law. As a result, the role of payment service providers is now much more in focus than it was a few years ago.
Why are these lawsuits particularly important?
The Federal Court of Justice has already dealt with the liability of payment service providers. However, this decision still referred to the previous legal situation under the 2012 Interstate Treaty on Gambling. In this case, the court denied liability.
Many companies still cite this older ruling.
However, this is precisely where a crucial difference lies: The lawsuits now filed concern the current legal situation under the State Treaty on Gambling 2021, whose regulations are formulated much more strictly. In particular, the explicit legal prohibition against participating in payments related to illegal gambling opens up new legal standards for assessment.
This is therefore not a mere repetition of previous procedures, but rather a model procedure under changed legal frameworks.
More than just gambling law
According to the preliminary findings, the investigation is not solely about possible violations of the State Treaty on Gambling. Die ausgewerteten Unterlagen und technischen Spuren werfen aus Sicht der Klägerseite auch weitere Fragen auf, etwa zu Themen wie Geldwäsche-Compliance, Identitätsprüfung, Transaktionsüberwachung sowie zur Einhaltung weiterer gesetzlicher Schutzpflichten.
Die Kanzlei Cocron hat hierfür mit mehreren IT-Forensikern zusammengearbeitet. The aim of this collaboration was to reconstruct payment processes, technical intermediate steps, forwarding and participating service providers as precisely as possible.
Especially with modern payment models, in which e-wallets, crypto exchange services and international platforms are interconnected, such technical analysis is often the crucial key to clarification.
What does this mean for the affected players?
This development is of considerable importance to consumers. Many clients report that they played on German-language websites and used well-known payment methods. Therefore, they initially assumed that the offer was legal or at least verified.
That is precisely one of the fundamental problems. The technical and visual design of payment methods often conveys an impression of trustworthiness, which is not necessarily legally justified.
Should it be legally confirmed that payment service providers were involved in processing such payments despite recognizable risks, this could significantly strengthen the legal position of aggrieved players.
Then it is no longer solely about claims against often difficult-to-reach casino operators abroad, but also about the responsibility of the companies that made the flow of money possible in the first place.
The lawsuits now filed are intended to clarify precisely these questions in court.
Significance beyond the individual case
The proceedings raise key questions about the practical scope of the 2021 State Treaty on Gambling:
Do payment service providers need to conduct more thorough checks today?
Is a purely technical “We only process payments” still sufficient?
Or are there further obligations to examine and refrain from certain transactions that appear suspicious and point towards illegal gambling structures?
The procedures therefore have a significance that extends far beyond individual cases. They could set important standards for how courts will assess payment transactions in the context of illegal online casinos in the future.
Professional exchange is expressly desired.
The law firm Cocron also sees the filed lawsuits as a contribution to the further legal analysis of this market.
Anyone who would like to engage professionally with these new model procedures or participate in the legal discussion is expressly welcome. We will provide ongoing updates on the further course of the proceedings.
Conclusion
Legally, illegal online gambling does not end with the casino itself. Anyone who facilitates, conceals, or continues to process payments despite clear indications may also come under scrutiny.
The new lawsuits filed by the Cocron law firm aim precisely to have this responsibility reviewed in court under the stricter regulations of the 2021 State Treaty on Gambling.
For affected players, this can be an important step to successfully enforce their losses, not just theoretically, but also in practice.
