The Supreme Court of Austria has ruled that bet-at-home must compensate a customer’s losses, totalling €2.8m (£2.37m) including interest.
The court’s verdict fell in favour of the plaintiff, whose addiction to gambling meant they were “legally incapacitated” at the time, according to those ruling on the decision.
Two brands in the form of Malta-based duo bet-at-home.com Entertainment and bet-at-home.com Internet, both of which are subsidiaries of bet-at-home.com, have been held liable for the financial damage.
A statement from the Frankfurt-listed company reads: “bet-at-home.com Internet did not offer online gaming services as a contractual partner to the plaintiff; bet-at-home.com Entertainment (in liquidation) was the sole contractual partner.
“However, the Supreme Court assumes that bet-at-home.com Internet. is liable for gambling losses incurred in this case under tort law.”
Bet-at-home, now owned by Banijay Group, opted to liquidate its Maltese subsidiary bet-at-home Entertainment in December 2022, having suspended operations two months prior amid claims surrounding player reimbursements.
The group’s statement went on to add: “Any claims for reimbursement or compensation or other compensatory claims against bet-at-home.com Entertainment (in liquidation) should also be determined and taken into account if applicable.”
It also outlined that bet-at-home.com Entertainment already has a provision of €2.3m in relation to the Supreme Court case.
News of the Austrian Supreme Court’s ruling comes a fortnight after an online operator was told it would be able to reclaim player winnings despite not having the required licence to actually operate in the country.
The unlicensed plaintiff in this case, also based in Malta, offered gambling services that were played by the defendant in Austria between May 2020 and July 2020, in which time they deposited €21,928 and received a total of €29,090.70, meaning their winnings total sat at €7,152.71.
The defendant has since been told to pay those winnings back to the operator, after the company looked to reclaim the funds on the basis they were won while the unnamed firm was operating without a licence, thus rendering the winnings void.
The Austrian Supreme Court agreed with that line of argument, though the decision to uphold the initial complaint initially came from the Court of Appeal.
The reasoning behind such a verdict stems from the fact that “the gambling monopoly not only aims to prevent financial losses for the player, but also to remove the incentive to take part in a prohibited game”.
The Supreme Court added: “The monopoly does not constitute protective provisions that exist exclusively for the benefit of one partner, but every partner can invoke the illegality and nullity of the contract”.
Debates surrounding player reimbursements continue to rumble on across multiple European nations, including Germany, where the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) recently referred questions concerning a customer’s refund request to the European Court of Justice (ECJ).
That saga saw one player seek reparations linked to losses of €3,719.26, accrued via a grey-market operator before the German market was regulated in 2021.
The post Bet-at-home forced to repay player €2.8m by Austrian Supreme Court first appeared on EGR Intel.