European Union Permits Courts to Take into Account Malta’s Gaming Protection Law When Freezing Assets

(AsiaGameHub) –   The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled that national courts may consider Malta’s gaming protection law, along with comparable legislation, when evaluating requests for urgent asset freezes. Nevertheless, the court refrained from deeming the contentious law unlawful.

This Decision Stems from a Gambling Dispute

This ruling originated from the ECJ’s Fourth Chamber, prompted by a disagreement involving an Austrian gambler and an operator registered in Malta. The player, identified as TQ, lost a substantial five-figure amount on Mr Green’s gaming platform some years prior and subsequently attempted to reclaim these funds. TQ argued that because Mr Green lacked an Austrian license at the time, the wagers placed were invalid.

Although Austrian courts ruled in TQ’s favor, the funds were not disbursed, leading the plaintiff to pursue a European Account Preservation Order to freeze Mr Green’s assets across various EU countries. Specifically, Mr Green maintains accounts in Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, and Sweden.

Consequently, the ECJ was tasked with clarifying what factors national courts are permitted to consider when assessing the justification or urgency for issuing such an order.

ECJ Affirms Laws Impeding Freezing Claims Are a Relevant Factor

Following its review, the ECJ declared that both a debtor’s prior actions and the presence of legislation potentially hindering an asset freezing claim are legitimate considerations for courts. Notably, Malta possesses a law designed to shield its domestic operators from liabilities arising in international markets.

Due to this, the plaintiff had previously indicated the possibility of Mr Green transferring assets to Malta to safeguard them from being frozen.

This represented a crucial advancement, particularly for the ongoing case, as Mr Green’s capacity to relocate its assets to a jurisdiction offering such protection could now be deemed a valid reason for an asset freeze.

Nevertheless, the legal dispute between TQ and Mr Green remains unresolved. Considering the recent ECJ ruling, Austrian courts will now decide on the appropriate next steps.