Brazil Supreme Court Judge Suspends 29 Betting Firm Lawsuits

By Priya Raman

Twenty-nine betting companies had their lawsuits against Brazil's online betting ban suspended on Monday by Supreme Court Justice Luiz Fux, a decision that also voids conflicting lower-court rulings issued in São Paulo's federal courts.

Fux acted on a request from the Prosecutor General's Office (PGR), which flagged the risk of legal insecurity from divergent rulings on the provisional measure (MP) that prohibited fixed-odds online games. That risk had already materialized: while some judges upheld the ban, others granted individual companies permission to keep operating. With Fux's order, those permissive decisions are suspended and lose their validity.

What does this change for operators?

Every company that won a lower-court reprieve now faces a uniform freeze. All cases challenging the MP stay on hold nationwide until the Supreme Court (STF) rules on actions contesting the measure, which the Lula government issued on the eve of the election. No date exists for that judgment.

The litigation record in São Paulo shows how fragmented the rulings had become. In early October, one of the first cases on the subject allowed Stake Brasil, the controlling company of Stake, to keep operating until the end of that month. The next day, the president of the Federal Regional Court of the 3rd Region, Judge Luís Antonio Johonsom di Salvo, suspended that order.

Last Friday, the same judge struck down a preliminary injunction that had authorized CDA Gaming's three operators — Casa de Apostas, Betsul and Jogo Online — to resume operations in Brazil. The overturned decision had been signed by Judge Adriana Pileggi. Before the case reached her chamber, a federal judge had denied CDA's request.

Beyond those cases, 25 other betting firms filed suits in the São Paulo federal courts seeking to keep operating during the prohibition. They include Blaze, Estrelabet, Aposta Bet, Sortenabet, Betvip, Supremabet and Betboom. Some filed their actions asking that they be routed to the court that issued the first ruling favorable to the betting firms — a forum-shopping tactic the nationwide suspension now neutralizes.

When will the Supreme Court rule?

Not this year, by most accounts. Fux has told interlocutors he intends to examine the case carefully and write a robust opinion on the issue. Last week, the justice highlighted the contributions gathered in a public hearing on the bets, but said he would still need time to deliver his view.

That signals, combined with Monday's decision to suspend related cases across the country, are expected to push the betting judgment into next year. The justices are also considering unifying the betting discussions with the debates on lotteries and other games of chance, raising the possibility of a single joint ruling on all the topics.

For operators and their legal teams, the practical consequence is a single waiting game: no lower court will hand them a lifeline while the STF deliberates.