On March 19, 2026, the focus of both the online gambling industry and the affected players will be on Luxembourg.
In case C-530/24 (“Tipico”), the Advocate General at the European Court of Justice, Nicholas Emiliou, has presented his opinion. The procedure is based on a referral from the Federal Court of Justice (I ZR 90/23).
The focus is on a fundamental question for the German market:
Can a provider who has offered online sports betting in Germany without the required authorization invoke the freedom to provide services guaranteed under EU law and legally offer their services on the German market even without a German license?
In this blog post you will learn:
- which legal issues are at the heart of case C-530/24 (“Tipico”) before the European Court of Justice
- why the Advocate General’s concluding opinions are of particular importance to online sports betting players
- Under what conditions can losses from online sports betting be reclaimed?
- what impact the upcoming decision may have on current and future proceedings
Subject matter and scope of the proceedings
The significance of the procedure extends far beyond the individual case.
It concerns not only the civil law recovery of losses from online gambling, but also the fundamental structure of German sports betting law.
The core question is whether a national license is mandatory for offerings to players in Germany, or whether providers from other member states can invoke the fundamental freedoms under EU law – in particular Article 56 TFEU – and thus be allowed to carry out their activities without a German license.
This places the tension between the German licensing system and the European freedom to provide services at the center of the legal assessment.
The preliminary questions of the Federal Court of Justice
The German Federal Court of Justice has submitted two key questions to the European Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling:
Firstly, it should be clarified whether the freedom to provide services under Article 56 TFEU precludes treating an online sports betting contract concluded without national authorization as void if the provider had applied for authorization but the underlying licensing procedure was contrary to EU law.
Secondly, it concerns the classification of the national permit requirement as a protective law and the resulting possibility of deriving claims for damages.
Legal framework: Licensing requirement for online sports betting
According to the Interstate Treaty on Gambling 2021, the offering of online sports betting in Germany is subject to a licensing requirement.
The Joint Gambling Authority of the Länder maintains an official whitelist listing the approved providers. Providers who are not listed there are considered by the authorities to be illegal.
It should be emphasized that simply submitting an application for a permit does not legalize the offer. Erst die tatsächliche Erteilung der Erlaubnis sowie die Aufnahme in die Whitelist begründen Rechtssicherheit.
Diese Rechtsauffassung ist zwischenzeitlich durch eine Vielzahl gerichtlicher Entscheidungen bestätigt worden.
The procedure is particularly relevant for sports betting trials.
The “Tipico” case is therefore of particular importance because the Federal Court of Justice did not submit the case in the context of an administrative licensing dispute, but rather in a civil recovery proceeding.
The focus is therefore not only on the EU law assessment of the German regulatory system, but also on the specific question of whether players can reclaim their losses from corresponding contracts with sports betting providers.
This gives case C-530/24 a central importance for a large number of pending and future proceedings in Germany.
The Advocate General’s opinions are not binding on the Court. However, they regularly provide a structured and often guiding basis for decision-making, which the Court of Justice frequently follows in essential points.
Result of the concluding submissions:
I: In principle, German permission is required.
Advocate General Emiliou concludes that, in principle, a German license is required to offer online sports betting to players located in Germany.
National authorities and courts are therefore authorized to enforce this requirement even against providers who have operated without the appropriate license.
This expressly includes the application of the legal consequences provided for in national civil law.
For players, this means:
If a provider operated without a German license, the underlying contracts may be legally contestable.
II: Provider may not invoke deficiencies in the approval process
Furthermore, it follows from the Advocate General’s statements that providers cannot simply claim that they did not receive a license due to deficiencies in the approval process.
Rather, the protection afforded by EU law is ensured by the fact that the approval procedure itself can be reviewed by the courts – not by operating on the market without a license.
This is a key point for players:
A provider cannot simply exonerate itself by claiming that the licensing procedure was flawed.
III: Sportwetten-Anbieter ohne Lizenz muss Einsätze zurückerstatten
According to the Advocate General, a sports betting operator who has operated without the required license may be obliged to refund the stakes received from the players.
This sends a clear signal in favor of the enforceability of German regulations and player protection. Losses from online sports betting can generally be reclaimed if the offer was made without the required license.
IV: Exceptions
Whether such a claim exists in a particular case depends largely on whether there are any special exceptional circumstances.
Such an exception may exist if government authorities have given the provider specific, unambiguous and unconditional assurances that the licensing requirement will not be enforced temporarily.
For players, this means:
In such situations, enforcing claims against the provider may be difficult or impossible.
However, the Advocate General explicitly emphasizes that this exception must be interpreted narrowly and requires specific assurances from the authorities.
Classification: The procedure extends far beyond sports betting
The Luxembourg judges are not merely dealing with a single supplier here. The issue at hand is a fundamental conflict in European gambling law: How far does the freedom of cross-border providers extend – and how far may a member state isolate or condition its market for reasons of player protection?
For courts, providers and those affected, this is a landmark decision.
With the 2021 State Treaty on Gambling, Germany opted for a restrictive licensing system. The European Court of Justice will now have to clarify to what extent this system also holds up in light of Union law – particularly in subsequent civil law situations.
Are you affected yourself?
We will review your case individually,
- whether a provider without the required license has operated in your case
- whether there are claims for reimbursement
- and how these can be enforced in a legally and economically sound manner
We would be happy to assist you with the legal classification of your case.
About lawyer István Cocron
Lawyer István Cocron has specialized in advising and representing clients in the field of gambling law for many years.
One focus of his work is the legal analysis of online gambling offers and the enforcement of refund claims by affected players.
He represents clients nationwide both out of court and in court proceedings and regularly deals with current developments in German and European gambling law.
Frequently asked questions about online sports betting and recovering losses
What do the current final submissions in the Tipico case at the ECJ mean for me?
The Advocate General’s opinion provides an initial legal assessment of how the European Court of Justice might evaluate the key issues relating to online sports betting.
Although they are not legally binding, the Court of Justice frequently adopts key points from them.
In the current proceedings, there is much to suggest that the position of players will be strengthened – especially with regard to the question of whether providers without German authorization can be obliged to reimburse losses.
How can I reclaim losses from online sports betting?
A refund may be considered in particular if the provider did not have the required German license during the relevant period.
However, whether and to what extent a claim exists depends on the specific circumstances of the individual case, in particular on the provider, the period and the legal classification of the contracts.
How can I tell if the provider had a German license?
The decisive factor is whether the provider had a permit under the State Treaty on Gambling during the respective period and was listed on the so-called whitelist of the Joint Gambling Authority of the Länder.
A mere license from another state, such as Malta, is generally not sufficient for this.
Is a provider with a gambling license from another country (e.g. Malta) allowed to operate platforms in Germany?
Many providers have licenses from other countries and claim to be entitled to offer their services in Germany as well.
Whether this is legally permissible is disputed and the subject of the current proceedings before the European Court of Justice.
The core issue is whether providers can effectively invoke the European freedom to provide services, or whether a national permit is still required for offers to players in Germany.
How important is the timing of my losses from online sports betting?
Der Zeitraum, in dem die Einsätze getätigt wurden, ist für die rechtliche Bewertung von zentraler Bedeutung.
In particular, developments in regulation and case law can influence whether and to what extent claims exist.
How long do I have to claim back my losses from online sports betting?
Claims for reimbursement are subject to a statute of limitations.
Whether a limitation period has already expired depends on the individual case, in particular on when the claims arose and whether there are any measures in place to suspend the limitation period.
How will my case be reviewed regarding the recovery of stakes from online sports betting?
The legal assessment is generally based on your gaming and payment data as well as the specific provider structure.
Only on this basis can it be assessed whether and to what extent claims exist and how these can be enforced.
