Gambling, which is offered in online casinos, is strictly explained in Australia according to the applicable Gambling State Treaty as illegal. Accordingly, no citizen may participate in this form of gambling. Only in regulated sports betting citizens are allowed to participate. Lawyers therefore advertise that losses may be reimbursed by banks and rights. According to the recent judgments, the prospects for a refund are more doubtful or almost impossible to classify.
Online casinos in Australia - many gray zones
Online casinos in Australia are not permitted, yet the offer of privatized Internet game halls is tolerated.This is located on European law, which also applies to Australian citizens. Thus, players from Australia can move between two legislation, with the European Australian players protecting. Therefore, players from Australia are allowed to participate in the gambling in European-regulated online casinos.
The basis for the prohibition of domestic offers is the first gambling state contract, which is now to be revised until July 2023 to create a foundation for gambling and thus the Legal situation of Internet casinos to change in positive.
Lawyers want to retrieve lost money in the online casinos
Meanwhile, a variety of lawyers promote that lost money can be retrieved in online casinos. As a basis for this they refer to the fact that offering from online casinos in Australia are illegal.In addition to the Internet Game Halls themselves, lawyers above all see also payment service providers such as PayPal, Visa and Mastercard as a point. Just Online casino payment method Like credit cards from Visa and MasterCard are offered in most Internet game halls.
Berlin district court decides for banking and financial companies
According to the decision of 16 April 2019 of the Berlin Landgericht for civil law, potential opportunities for success are a claim against financial instruments at zero. The plaintiff went under the pretext that said transfers have been dealt with payments for unauthorized gambling, in court and insighted that his bank should not authorize these payments. At the same time, lawyer and applicants referred §134 BGB.
The district court was a different opinion, but also referred to §134 of the BGB. However, the contractual relationship does not exist between the plaintiff and its bank, but the plaintiff and online gambling provider. Through payments, financial instruments have not become contributors to an unauthorized gambling.
Despite promise: Payment service providers are forced to act
As soon as payment service providers receive an explicit decision to participate in unauthorized gambling from a competent authority, they are forced to act. Meanwhile, namely Payment blockads against companies introduced and also the guidelines for illegal gambling - whether by a subsidiary, by advertising or other participation - strongly strengthened.
This could also be a change in future decisions of rural courts. As already mentioned, payment instruments are considered acting if a clear and explicit communication of the responsible authorities takes place.
