CJEU decision may strengthen Finland’s gambling enforcement
A key ruling from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), delivered on 16 April 2026, has clarified that member states can restrict certain forms of online gambling, even when those services are legally licenced elsewhere within the bloc. Crucially, it also opens the door for players to seek compensation from operators that offered such services in markets where they were not permitted.
The decision was given to a dispute involving Lottoland, a Malta-licenced lottery betting operator targeting Germany at a time when online gambling was prohibited. The Court found that players may be entitled to recover losses if such services were provided unlawfully in that market.
For Finland, the implications could extend well beyond legal interpretation. The decision is expected to influence how the country shapes its upcoming regulatory framework ahead of the planned 2027 market opening. Speaking to SiGMA News, Antti Koivula, Chief Compliance Officer at Hippos ATG, said the ruling may play a role in how authorities refine and implement the future licencing model.
Koivula said the timing of the ruling is significant. “With the opening of the new gambling market now a little over 14 months away, and with operators facing both the risk of failing the reliability and suitability assessment and potential player recovery claims following Lottoland, authorities can certainly use this moment to put pressure on the numerous unregulated operators targeting the Finnish market,” he said.
Position may change in 2027
The Finnish situation remains more nuanced. The current framework does not explicitly prohibit foreign operators from offering services to Finnish players. Instead, enforcement hinges on whether an operator has actively targeted the market through marketing and enabled participation, both of which are restricted under national law. That position may evolve as Finland prepares to introduce its new licencing system in 2027.
“There is still time, and the authorities now have a real opportunity to use the current legal environment more effectively. “
– Antti Koivula, CCO at Hippos ATG
Koivula pointed to the growing legal risk created by the ruling. “The Lottoland ruling adds another layer of risk by opening the door to player recovery claims,” he said. “Unlicenced operators may now face legal exposure if they are found targeting restricted markets.” He added that, in Finland’s case, a prohibition order could be crucial in establishing that breach.
Until now, such prohibition orders have largely functioned as administrative tools, typically paired with conditional fines. Their effectiveness, however, has often been questioned, particularly in cross-border scenarios.
“Finland’s National Police Board (NPB) prohibition orders are designed as cease-and-desist tools backed by conditional fines, but their actual enforcement power, especially beyond Finland, remains very limited,” Koivula noted. “In reality, operators have found ways around these measures”, he added.
Payment blocking mechanisms have faced similar criticism. Operators, he stressed, “they have been able to restructure their operations to remain outside the scope of such measures, exposing broader weaknesses in the current enforcement framework.”
That dynamic, however, may now be shifting. Under Finland’s forthcoming multi-licence system, prohibition orders are expected to carry more greater weight. Operators that have received such orders within a defined period could be deemed unsuitable for licencing, effectively shutting them out of the regulated market.
“That shifts their role from symbolic enforcement to something with tangible commercial consequences,” Koivula said.
Expect a new blocking mechanism?
The Lottoland Case C-440/23 on which the CJEU gave ruling itself came out of a dispute involving Maltese-licenced operators that were targeting Germany at a time when online gambling was banned there. Judges pointed to the risks tied to online gambling, easy access, player anonymity, and the higher exposure for vulnerable users as key reasons behind that stance.
For Finland, the impact isn’t immediate, but it does add weight over time. The need for formal prohibition orders remains a barrier in many cases, but the ruling strengthens the legal basis for future claims and gives regulators a firmer basis to act.
It also increases pressure on regulators as the 2027 transition approaches. Finland is preparing to move away from its long-standing monopoly model towards a competitive licencing system, aiming to strike a balance between market attractiveness and effective consumer protection.
So far, enforcement trends suggest a measured approach. “Despite this, only a small number of operators have faced full prohibition orders so far,” Koivula said, stressing that this reflects a regulatory stance that has been cautious rather than aggressive.
Whether that approach will shift remains uncertain. With stronger legal backing now in place and the licencing window drawing closer, experts believe that the coming months could prove critical in determining how firmly Finland chooses to act.
Subscribe HERE to SiGMA’s Top 10 News countdown and SiGMA’s weekly newsletter to stay up to date with all the latest iGaming News from the biggest iGaming community in the world and benefit from subscriber-only offers.
