EU court to rule on Malta’s Bill 55 on 19 November: what is at stake for operators
The Court of Justice of the EU is due to give judgment on 19 November 2026 in case C-683/24, the first ruling to test Malta’s Bill 55, according to the court’s calendar as reported by German and Austrian legal press. Bill 55 added Article 56A to Malta’s Gaming Act in June 2023 and tells Maltese courts to refuse to recognise or enforce foreign judgments against Malta-licensed operators when the claim rests on their services being illegal abroad but legal in Malta. In practice it has blocked Austrian and German players from collecting judgments that ordered operators to repay their losses. In April the Advocate General advised the court that the question is inadmissible, but added that, if the court answers it, Article 56A is manifestly incompatible with EU law.
The short version
- Judgment in C-683/24 is expected on 19 November 2026; the case was referred by the Vienna Commercial Court (Handelsgericht Wien) in October 2024.
- The questions concern the Brussels I bis Regulation: whether a member state may refuse, automatically and on public-policy or economic grounds, to recognise judgments from other EU courts against its gaming licensees.
- Advocate General Emiliou (23 April 2026) proposed that the reference be declared inadmissible; in the alternative, he found Article 56A manifestly incompatible with the regulation and said economic harm to the industry cannot justify it.
- The ruling lands as Austria prepares to license online casino from 1 October 2027 and to require that Austrian judgments be enforceable in a licensee’s home state.
What the court has been asked
| Point | Detail |
|---|---|
| Case | C-683/24, Spielerschutz Sigma Prozessfinanzierungs GmbH v Geissler Heilbock Hopf Ferox Legal, referred by the Handelsgericht Wien |
| The dispute | A litigation funder is suing the law firm that advised it that Malta’s rule was manifestly contrary to EU law, after a Maltese court refused enforcement under Article 56A on 1 August 2023 |
| Questions | Whether Articles 1, 45, 46 and 52 of Brussels I bis preclude a national rule that refuses recognition of judgments against gaming licensees whose services are lawful at home; whether it matters that the refusal is automatic; whether public policy or economic interest can justify it; and whether a six-month wait for a first-instance decision breaches the duty to act without delay |
| Who took part | The parties, the Belgian, Czech, German, Greek, Maltese and Austrian governments, and the European Commission |
| Advocate General | Nicholas Emiliou, opinion of 23 April 2026: reference inadmissible; in the alternative, Article 56A manifestly incompatible with Brussels I bis, and no country-of-origin principle for online gambling |
According to the opinion, every party that commented apart from Malta described Article 56A as manifestly incompatible with EU law, while Malta called it a declaratory provision. The court does not have to follow the Advocate General, and it can decide the case on admissibility without answering the main questions.
Why Bill 55 matters
Thousands of players in Austria and Germany have sued Malta-licensed operators to recover losses on the ground that the operators had no local licence. Claimant lawyers interviewed by Investigate Europe in 2025 put the number of claims in the two countries at around 50,000. Austrian courts have granted many of them, but Maltese courts have refused to enforce the judgments: in July 2023 against an Austrian ruling in a PokerStars case, and in February 2025 in two cases, although reports differ on whether that February decision relied on Article 56A or on the public-policy clause of Brussels I bis.
The court’s 2026 rulings have already narrowed the ground. In Wunner (C-77/24, 15 January 2026) it held that a player suing the directors of an unlicensed foreign operator can generally rely on the law of their country of residence. In European Lotto and Betting (C-440/23, 16 April 2026) it held that a member state may ban online casino and lottery betting even by operators licensed elsewhere in the EU, and that such a ban can support nullity and refund claims. The European Commission opened an infringement procedure against Malta over Article 56A in June 2025; the Malta Gaming Authority said then that the article is not a blanket ban and reflects EU law.
What it means for operators and suppliers
If the court answers the questions and follows the Advocate General’s alternative view, Maltese courts could no longer use Article 56A to stop Austrian and German refund judgments from being enforced, and operators that served those markets without a local licence would face judgments that can be collected in Malta. If the court finds the reference inadmissible, Article 56A stands for now, and the Commission’s infringement case becomes the main route to change it. Either way, the court’s earlier 2026 rulings already leave little room for the argument that an EU hub licence covers a market that bans or licenses online casino itself.
For Austria the timing is direct. Its government bill, now held up by Malta’s objection until 7 December, lets only companies seated in a state where Austrian judgments can be enforced apply for an online licence, and gives unlicensed operators until 31 December 2026 to leave. Our guide to online casino in Europe sets these rules beside the other European markets, and the licence guide covers how hub licences compare with local ones. For suppliers, the practical step is the same in every scenario: switch content and settings per market, as a catalogue with per-market controls in the casino API allows, so an operator’s market exits and licence conditions do not need a separate build.
Building for Europe’s licensed markets
IGP delivers the casino platform and 150+ studios through one integration, with games and limits switched per market as each licence requires. Tell us which European markets you plan to enter.
See iGaming solutions for Europe →Sources: Court of Justice of the EU: Advocate General’s Opinion in C-683/24, press release 65/26 (23 April 2026); ISA-Guide: CJEU judgment on Bill 55 set for 19 November (19 October 2026); CLLB Rechtsanwälte: CJEU ruling on Malta’s Bill 55 on 19 November (19 October 2026); CasinoBeats: Bill 55 and the enforcement of judgments in Malta (20 October 2026); Court of Justice of the EU: Wunner, C-77/24, press release 2/26 (15 January 2026); Court of Justice of the EU: European Lotto and Betting, C-440/23, press release 53/26 (16 April 2026); European Commission: June 2025 infringements package (18 June 2025); iGB: European Commission challenges Malta’s Article 56A (19 June 2025); iGB: Maltese court will not enforce Austrian player-loss judgments (28 February 2025); Investigate Europe: how Bill 55 shields Malta’s gambling industry (6 March 2025).