On April 23, Advocate General Nicholas Emiliou of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) delivered a non-binding opinion that Malta's Bill 55 is "manifestly incompatible" with EU law, dealing the second significant legal setback to the country's iGaming protective regime in just over a week. The opinion follows a binding CJEU ruling on April 16 that upheld EU member states' rights to prohibit online gambling services licensed in other member states and to allow player restitution claims.
The Core Dispute: Bill 55's Article 56A
Bill 55, passed in June 2023, introduced Article 56A into Malta's Gaming Act. This provision instructs Maltese courts to refuse recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments against Maltese-licensed gaming operators where the underlying services were lawful under Maltese law. The Malta Gaming Authority (MGA) has consistently maintained that Article 56A does not introduce new grounds for rejecting foreign judgments beyond those already established under EU law, and that it merely codifies Malta's long-standing public policy on gaming matters.
However, in Case C-683/24 (Spielerschutz Sigma), Emiliou declared the provision "manifestly incompatible with the rules governing the recognition and enforcement of judgments" under the EU's Brussels I bis Regulation. He found that Malta cannot rely on the public policy (ordre public) clause of the regulation to block recognition of such judgments on the basis that other member states allegedly misapplied EU law, including the freedom to provide services. Substantive EU law issues, the AG noted, cannot be re-examined at the recognition and enforcement stage under the guise of the public policy exception.
Rejection of Cross-Border Licensing Claims
The Advocate General also rejected the premise underlying Malta's defense of Bill 55, which is that an MGA license grants operators the right to offer their services freely across the bloc. Under the current state of EU law, Emiliou wrote, member states are under no obligation to recognize gambling licenses issued by other member states. The country-of-origin principle does not extend to online gambling, and member states may apply their own gambling laws to operators licensed elsewhere.
Emiliou further observed that Bill 55 appears designed primarily to shield Malta's iGaming industry from the financial consequences of foreign restitution claims. Combined with the April 16 binding ruling, these two outcomes significantly narrow Malta's legal defense of its cross-border iGaming licensing model.
Economic Stakes for Malta
The stakes for Malta are substantial. According to the MGA's 2024 annual report, the iGaming sector generated €1.386 billion in gross value added and, with indirect spillover included, accounted for 10.1% of the national economy. A final CJEU judgment, expected later this year, could expose Maltese operators to a wave of compensation claims from players across the EU. AG opinions are not binding on the CJEU, but the court follows them in roughly two-thirds of cases.
The MGA has not yet issued an official response to the latest opinion but has previously defended Article 56A as fully compliant with EU law.