On Thursday, Advocate General Nicholas Emiliou delivered his opinion in case C-440/23, a landmark dispute pitting Malta’s attempts to safeguard its gambling industry against Germany’s push for stronger consumer protection.
September 2025 | Divided Opinions – Difference News (rewritten edition)
Tensions between Malta and the European Union escalated this week as the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in Luxembourg heard a case that could redefine the balance between national gambling rules and the EU’s single market principles.
On Thursday, Advocate General Nicholas Emiliou delivered his opinion in case C-440/23, a landmark dispute pitting Malta’s attempts to safeguard its gambling industry against Germany’s push for stronger consumer protection.
Malta’s Bill 55 Sparks EU Alarm
The controversy centers on Bill 55, passed in June 2023, which prevents Maltese courts from enforcing foreign judgments seeking gambling loss compensation. In practice, the law shields Maltese-licensed operators from liability in other EU jurisdictions.
The European Commission has already opened infringement proceedings, arguing the law violates the EU principle of mutual recognition of judgments.
The case was triggered by a German lawyer representing a player who sought repayment of gambling losses. The lawyer sued two Malta-licensed operators, claiming contracts with German customers were invalid since the operators were unlicensed in Germany. He contended that Maltese companies had profited from games banned under German law.
Operators Defend Market Freedom
In response, Maltese operators argue that freedom to provide services under EU law supports their case, insisting it is Germany’s restrictive regime, not their operations, that conflicts with EU principles. A Maltese court referred the dispute to the ECJ, effectively turning a private lawsuit into a test case for cross-border gambling law.
Advocate General’s Opinion
The Malta Gaming Authority (MGA) has consistently defended Bill 55, insisting it does not grant absolute immunity but aligns with existing legal norms, such as the ability to reject foreign rulings that conflict with national public policy.
At Thursday’s hearing, however, Advocate General Emiliou stated that claims for reimbursement of illegal gambling losses cannot be dismissed as an abuse of EU law. He stressed that operators’ attempts to rely on such defenses would likely fail.
