Crash Gambling
Pragmatic Play Casinos
NetEnt Casinos
Playtech Casinos
Microgaming Casinos
Novomatic Casinos
Evolution Casinos
Merkur Casinos
BGaming Casinos
Play’n GO Casinos
Quickspin Casinos
PayPal Casinos
Skrill Casinos
Neteller Casinos
Debit Card Casinos
Paysafecard Casinos
Amex Casinos
EcoPayz Casinos
Interac Casinos
MuchBetter Casinos
Trustly Casinos
The iGaming sector is witnessing a clash of perspectives as Gluecksspiel (GGL), the Federal Authority of German Gambling, voices its reservations about Malta’s “Bill-55” and its alignment with European Union regulations. This bill, titled the “Gaming Amendment Bill,” has ignited a discussion that delves into the intricacies of cross-border gambling and the recognition of foreign judgments.
The Core of Bill-55
Enacted in June and bearing the signature of Malta President George Vella, Bill-55 has brought to light significant legal debates. This legislation empowers Maltese courts to reject the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments pertaining to the online gambling sector.
The bill’s intent is to offer protection to Malta’s licensed operators, particularly those under the Malta Gambling Authority (MGA), in cases where actions conflict with the provision of gaming services within the country.
Divided Perspectives
The introduction of Bill-55 has triggered debates among European regulators, especially German and Austrian gambling authorities. These regulators argue that the bill’s provisions hinder their efforts to address potential infringements by MGA-licensed operators on their respective markets.
This disagreement reflects the complexity of harmonizing gambling laws across various EU member states.
150% on first purchase - Get Up To GC 57,500 & SC 27.5 FREE
Protective Shield or Legal Conflict?
Bill-55’s authorization has sparked controversy, raising questions about whether it establishes a precedent that allows national courts to deny recognition and enforcement of actions by foreign governments or their related gambling authorities. The German gambling authority, GGL, expressed concerns about the compatibility of Bill-55 with EU regulations for the recognition of decisions.
A Matter of Compatibility
In response to GGL’s critique, Malta stands firm on its stance, emphasizing that its MGA licence enables businesses domiciled in the country to offer services throughout the EU based on the principle of free movement of goods and services.
The MGA maintains that this principle includes the cross-border provision of betting and gaming products, even in the face of varying gambling laws across EU member states.
Unresolved Questions
As the debate unfolds, key questions remain unanswered. The extent to which Bill-55 impacts the reliability of gambling providers under both civil and gaming law remains uncertain. The intricacies of how legal actions by operators will be treated and interpreted under this bill await clarification.
A Path Forward
The clash over Malta’s Bill-55 exemplifies the ongoing challenge of harmonizing gambling laws in the EU. With diverse perspectives and potential implications for cross-border gambling, this debate has the potential to reshape how gaming operators navigate legal complexities in a rapidly evolving iGaming landscape.
As the iGaming industry continues to navigate this legal debate, stakeholders across the sector remain watchful, anticipating the resolution of this clash of viewpoints and its implications for the future of cross-border gambling operations.
Written by 
Select Language