Dutch Supreme Court to Rule on Pre-2021 Gambling Contracts

Advocate General Siewert Lindenbergh has advised that gambling contracts concluded before the Netherlands implemented its licensing framework in April 2021 should not automatically be considered invalid. His guidance follows inquiries from the district courts of Amsterdam and Noord-Holland, which are hearing test cases filed by players seeking reimbursement for losses incurred prior to the country’s formal regulation of online gambling.

Lindenbergh’s analysis emphasizes that the Dutch Betting and Gaming Act regulates the act of offering games without a licence rather than the contracts themselves. Enforcement, he notes, has traditionally been channeled through administrative and criminal law, not civil nullity. He also underscores that individual remedies, such as rescission for mistake or tort claims, can address particular cases without declaring all historical contracts void.

The AG highlights that online gambling existed in the Netherlands for decades before a licensing regime was established, and policy guidance never suggested that pre-regulation contracts were invalid. This contrasts with decisions in other European countries, including Germany and Austria, where unlicensed contracts have been treated as null, allowing players to claim restitution.

While Lindenbergh’s opinion is non-binding, it strongly informs the Supreme Court, which will decide whether Dutch courts should unify their approach. The ruling is expected to have major implications for operators and players, potentially limiting mass reimbursement claims while providing a framework for resolving individual disputes. As the Dutch gambling sector continues to mature, this decision could set a precedent for handling historical contracts and align civil remedies with regulatory intent.