Jetbull is an open company providing information to all media interested.

We will be happy to give you more detailed information about the company itself, its products and services, as well as about the online betting market in general, including expert analyses and worldwide trends. Feel free to contact us at: media@jetbull.com

Jetbull is a global player in the most global media ever – the Internet. Thanks to the Internet you don't have to go practically anywhere nowadays and you can take care of everything comfortably from your home. Naturally, one of such things is online betting.

Since online betting is a frequent topic of different legal opinions that arise from the regulative framework which was drawn up at a time when the Internet hadn't existed, we would like to acquaint you here with the breakthrough precedential law cases which rebut the doubts.

In five key court cases (Schindler, Läärä, Zenatti, Gambelli and Placanica), the European Court of Justice laid the foundations according to which the member states should act in the field of gambling games so as not to breach the principles of the free movement of services.

Ruling of the European Court of Justice in the Placanica case

The last ruling of the European Court of Justice so far was made in the Placanica case in 2007. The European Court of Justice plainly declared that operation of the state monopolies on gambling games and restricting of private entities at the same time is undoubtedly an offence against the principles of the free movement of services and the freedom of establishment. The Court based the declaration above all on the decision in the Gambelli case.

Gambelli case

In the end of 2003, the European Court of Justice ruled in the Gambelli case that the state monopoly on gambling games is permissible in the European Union member states to a limited extent only. Henceforth, each member state has to allow every licenced entity from a given country to run the activities in all the other member states as well. The European Court of Justice pointed out again that member states may prohibit the activities of private entities only in order to restrict the gambling opportunities in general. However, this is irreconcilable with operation of the state-owned lotteries and therefore with the principles of the free movement of services and the freedom of establishment.

Läärä and Zenatti cases

In the Läärä case of September 1999 the European Court of Justice disputed the legitimacy of the Finnish state monopoly on slot machines. In the Zenatti case also from 1999, the Court’s Advocate General Fennelly claimed that restrictions on operation of sports betting can be justified by public interest only. Again, public interest means restricting gambling opportunities as such, which is irreconcilable with operation of the state monopolies on gambling games.

Ruling in the Schindler case

In the Schindler case of 1994, the European Court of Justice ruled for the first time on two essential matters: operation of lotteries is a "service" in terms of the European law and restriction against licenced private entities cannot be justified by public interest (for example by crime prevention or by limiting the lottery opportunities as such, thus preventing the gambling addiction). Such intervention can be regarded as a breach of the principles of the free movement and the provision of services.