(AGENPARL) - Roma, 15 Gennaio 2026 - (AGENPARL) – Thu 15 January 2026 PRESS RELEASE No 2/26
Luxembourg, 15 January 2026
Judgment of the Court in Case C-77/24 | [Wunner] 1
Online games of chance: a player may, as a general rule, rely on the law of
his or her country of residence when bringing an action to establish
liability in tort or delict on the part of the directors of a foreign provider
that does not hold the required licence
The damage sustained by the player is deemed to have occurred in the country in which that player resides
A client, residing in Austria, of the Maltese provider of games of chance Titanium Brace Marketing, 2 currently in
liquidation, initiated proceedings against the two directors of that provider before the Austrian courts in order to
recover his losses incurred when he participated in online gambling. 3
Titanium held a gambling licence in Malta, but did not hold any licence in Austria. The client therefore submits that
the gambling contract 4 was null and void. According to him, the two directors are, under Austrian law, personally as
well as jointly and severally liable for the fact that Titanium offered illegal games of chance in Austria.
The two directors dispute the international jurisdiction of the Austrian courts. According to them, both the place
where the event that gave rise to the damage occurred and the place where the damage occurred were in Malta.
They further claim that the substantive law applicable is not Austrian law but Maltese law, which does not provide
for liability on the part of company’s officers vis-à-vis the company’s creditors.
The Austrian Supreme Court has put questions to the Court of Justice in that regard.
The Court of Justice observes that, according to the Rome II Regulation, 5 the law applicable to a non-contractual
obligation arising out of a tort or delict is, as a general rule, the law of the country in which the damage
occurs. 6
That regulation applies to an action seeking to establish tortious liability, such as that at issue, aimed at the directors
of a company, for infringement of a prohibition imposed by national legislation on offering games of chance to the
public without holding a licence for that purpose. Such an action is not covered by the exclusion provided in respect
of non-contractual obligations arising out of the law of companies. 7
According to the Court, in the context of an action for damages for losses incurred when participating in online
games of chance offered by a company in a Member State where that company did not hold the licence required by
law, the damage sustained by a player must be deemed to have occurred in the Member State in which that
player is habitually resident 8 (in the present case Austria, with the result that, according to the general rule,
Austrian law would be applicable).
That said, where it is clear from all the circumstances of the case that the tort or delict is manifestly more closely
connected with another country, the Rome II Regulation allows the court seised to depart from the general rule and
to apply the law of that other country.
Communications Directorate
Press and Information Unit
curia.europa.eu
NOTE: A reference for a preliminary ruling allows the courts and tribunals of the Member States, in disputes which
have been brought before them, to refer questions to the Court of Justice about the interpretation of European
Union law or the validity of a European Union act. The Court of Justice does not decide the dispute itself. It is for the
national court or tribunal to dispose of the case in accordance with the Court’s decision, which is similarly binding on
other national courts or tribunals before which a similar issue is raised.
Unofficial document for media use, not binding on the Court of Justice.
The full text, and, as the case may be, an abstract of the judgment is published on the CURIA website on the day of
delivery.
Stay Connected!
The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any party to the proceedings.
Titanium Brace Marketing Limited (‘Titanium’).
Titanium’s offer of games was available to the entire European market.
In order to be able to play on Titanium’s website, the client opened a ‘player account’. In order to fund that player account, he made a transfer from
his Austrian bank account to a bank account opened with a Maltese bank. That bank account was a real account belonging to Titanium, opened for
the client and separate from Titanium’s assets. When the player participated in a game of chance, the sum at stake was debited from the player
account and, in the event of a win, was credited to that player account.
Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations
(Rome II).
Irrespective of the country in which the event giving rise to the damage occurred and irrespective of the country or countries in which the indirect
consequences of that event occur.
That exclusion does not cover the liability of a director of a company arising out of an obligation that is external to the company’s affairs.
The place where the damage occurred is the place where the alleged damage actually manifests itself. In the present case, first, the alleged tort
consists in interference with the client’s interests, which are protected in law by the prohibition, applicable in the Member State in which he has his
habitual residence, on offering the public, without holding a licence for that purpose, the possibility of participating in online games of chance.
Second, the damage alleged by the client actually manifested itself when he participated, from Austria, in online games of chance offered in breach of
a prohibition applicable in that Member State. In those circumstances, the damage must be regarded as having occurred in Austria. Furthermore, in
the light of the very nature of online games of chance, which does not make it easy to situate them in a specific physical location, it must be stated
that those games took place where the player is habitually resident.
Communications Directorate
![Press Release 2/26: Judgment of the Court in Case C-77/24 | [Wunner]](https://agenparl.eu/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/image001-23.jpg)