Wunner sits right at the fault line between EU cross-border commerce and national gambling restrictions - and it lands in the middle of the ongoing political and legal fight between Austria (and other monopoly/restrictive jurisdictions) and Malta’s hub model.


THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION Case C-77/24 (Wunner) - 15 January 2026


WHAT THE COURT ACTUALLY DECIDED


Te case arose from Austrian proceedings in which an Austrian consumer sought damages linked to gambling offered in Austria without an Austrian licence, and targeted company directors (not only the operator) for alleged non-contractual liability. Te referring Austrian court asked the CJEU how EU conflict-of-laws rules apply.


Why the Wunner ruling


Two points from the ruling are doing the heavy lifting: Tese claims can fall under Rome II (non-contractual obligations) rather than being excluded as “company law” disputes. In other words, suing directors in tort for losses linked to allegedly illegal gambling activity is not automatically pushed outside Rome II just because directors are involved.


matters When the Court of Justice of the


European Union (CJEU) handed down its judgment in Case C-77/24


(Wunner) on 15 January 2026, it didn’t rewrite Europe’s fragmented gambling rulebook. But it did make one thing much clearer: if you offer online


gambling into a Member State without the local licence that state requires, the legal and financial consequences are


far more likely to be decided under the player’s home law - not yours.


For online gambling, the “place where the damage occurs” is, in principle, the player’s habitual residence. Te Court reasoned that online gambling doesn’t have a fixed physical locus in the way a land- based venue does, so the harm is treated as occurring where the player participates from (typically their home state). Tat means the player’s Member State law is the default applicable law under Rome II Article 4(1) for this type of claim. Put simply: operators can’t expect the centre of gravity of these disputes to drift toward the licensing state, server location, or corporate seat. In cases like this, the gravitational pull is toward the consumer’s jurisdiction.


WHAT IT MEANS FOR EU-FACING IGAMING OPERATORS


Wunner is not a single silver bullet for player claims - the national court still applies the ruling to the facts, and national rules on illegality, restitution, limitation, causation, and director liability will vary. But operationally, it sharpens four risk realities.


1) “Grey market” exposure becomes harder to cabin


If your business model relies on offering into jurisdictions where the regulator says ‘you need a local licence’ (even if you dispute that position), Wunner increases the probability that claims will be assessed under the player’s local law, including consumer-protective doctrines that may be more favourable to claimants.


2) Directors and officers become a more visible litigation target Te case specifically addresses claims brought directly against


134


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180  |  Page 181  |  Page 182