.svg)
In the wake of its deployment to block player refund claims, and despite months of silence, the European Commission insists it is still working on a response to Malta鈥檚 so-called Bill 55.
The European Union鈥檚 executive branch claims that it will still take a view on Malta's legal shield, which is blocking potentially hundreds of millions of player claims from proceeding.
Bill 55, which became an amendment to Malta鈥檚 Gaming Act once passed into law, has been controversial since it was first created in 2023.
The legal provision shields online companies based in the country from players attempting to claim back grey market gambling losses, on the grounds that it would violate the 鈥減ublic order鈥 of Malta.
Earlier this month, in two landmark decisions, a judge in Malta ruled the changes brought about by Bill 55 gave him legal standing to strike down judgments that had been transferred from Austria.
Mere months after Bill 55 was first introduced, the European Commission claims it has been examining its legality, following complaints from other member states that refusing to recognise foreign court judgments flies in the face of EU principles.
Questioned by 天涯海角社区, the commission said it was aiming 鈥渢o resolve this matter as quickly as possible鈥, despite issuing no proactive statements on an investigation that began more than 18 months ago.
A spokesperson told 天涯海角社区: 鈥淭he Commission is working in close contact with the Maltese authorities on the matter concerning the Maltese Bill No 55/2023 amending the 鈥楪aming Act, Cap. 583鈥. We are in a constructive dialogue with the Maltese authorities with the aim to resolve this matter as quickly as possible.鈥
Meanwhile in Deutschland
While the commission continues to deliberate, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has confirmed that it will hear a case on April 9 which could have a profound effect on the player refund saga.
The CJEU will consider case , brought by lottery betting company Lottoland, to determine whether Germany鈥檚 former regulatory model was in breach of EU law.
The court will rule on whether a previous ban on online casino games in Germany, prior to the country鈥檚 re-regulation in 2021, was in breach of Article 56 of TFUE, which governs free trade among member states.
A finding that this regulatory system was illegal would throw huge doubt on the thousands of player claims past and present that have been prosecuted in Germany.
Although decisions have not gone unanimously in favour of players in German courts, millions of euros have been successfully claimed by players arguing that any online gambling done with operators that were not nationally licensed constituted a void legal contract between the gambling and the provider.
A CJEU ruling that operators were not acting illegally by passporting their Maltese and other licences into Germany during a period when it restricted a segment of the market would at least throw doubt on many ongoing player claims and possibly rule out their feasibility altogether.
