Vienna, Mar 31: Austria’s top court has ruled that company directors can be held personally liable for player losses in certain online gambling disputes, marking a significant shift in legal accountability in the sector.
The ruling by the Supreme Court of Austria (OGH) states that liability may extend to directors if breaches of tort law are established, particularly in cases involving operators without valid licences in Austria.
The decision follows a legal opinion by Advocate General Nicholas Emiliou of the Court of Justice of the European Union, who suggested that gambling losses could be treated as civil harm under tort law, allowing players to seek compensation beyond contractual claims.
The issue stems from a series of cases commonly referred to as the “Wunner” dispute, where Austrian players have sought repayment of losses from foreign-based online gambling operators not licensed under Austria’s regulatory framework.
Austrian courts have previously held that such operators violate the country’s monopoly-based gambling system, rendering contracts with players void and enabling compensation claims.
The latest ruling goes further by allowing claims to be directed at company executives, potentially bypassing challenges in enforcing judgments against firms operating across borders.
Legal experts say the move could increase pressure on directors involved in cross-border gambling operations, particularly in jurisdictions where companies do not hold local licences.
The development has also intensified a legal dispute between Austria and Malta, a major hub for online gambling firms.
Malta introduced legislation in 2023 allowing its courts to refuse enforcement of certain foreign judgments if they conflict with national public policy.
Courts there have already used this provision to block Austrian rulings in player compensation cases.
However, Austrian authorities argue that such refusals may violate the European Union’s principle of mutual recognition of judicial decisions.
The matter has been referred to the CJEU to determine its compatibility with EU rules governing cross-border enforcement.
The case highlights broader differences in regulatory approaches, with Austria following a state-controlled gambling model, while Malta operates a licensing regime widely used by European operators.
Analysts say the ruling could expose company executives to increased legal risks, though its practical enforcement across jurisdictions remains uncertain as the dispute continues in European courts.
