BVerwG Berlin arcade law 2016: Allegations, Court Orders and Status

What this case is about

On 16 December 2016 the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Federal Administrative Court), 8th Senate, decided a group of Berlin arcade cases led by docket 8 C 6.15.

The group also includes 8 C 7.15, 8 C 8.15, 8 C 4.16, 8 C 5.16 and 8 C 8.16. The operators of four existing and one planned Spielhallen (arcades) sued Land Berlin, starting in 2012.

They challenged the Berlin Spielhallengesetz of 2011: its ban on multi-site complexes (Verbundverbot), the 500 m minimum distance between arcades and the cap on machines (Gerätehöchstzahl). They relied on Art. 12 of the Basic Law (Grundgesetz, occupational freedom) and Art. 56 TFEU (freedom to provide services).

The case belongs to Licensing and Administrative Court Cases, the group of disputes in which operators contest licensing rules.

Who is covered

The plaintiffs are arcade operators in Berlin. The defendant is Land Berlin. Before the federal court, the Verwaltungsgericht Berlin ruled on 1 March 2013 (4 K 336.12) and the OVG Berlin-Brandenburg on 11 June 2015 (OVG 1 B 5.13).

The ruling affects arcade operators and licensing authorities applying comparable rules. German decisions of every kind are listed under Gambling Lawsuits in Germany.

Is there a payout?

No payout exists in this case. It is an administrative challenge to a state law by operators, and the record shows no fund, damages award or claim process for players.

What the court decided

The Federal Administrative Court upheld the Berlin Spielhallengesetz. It held that the new permit requirements, the ban on multi-site complexes, the 500 m minimum distance and the five-year transition period for existing arcades were lawful.

Companion judgments covered operating-hour restrictions (8 C 8.15), the minimum distance (8 C 8.16) and transition protection after a change of operator (8 C 16.16).

As of 14 November 2026 the status is judgment, with a status date of 16 December 2016. No later step appears in the record.

Why it matters

The judgments are a precedent for state arcade laws. They confirm that distance rules, bans on complexes and transition periods can pass review under both the Basic Law and EU freedom-to-provide-services rules.

Comparable operator challenges are collected under Operators Against Regulators and States.

Related cases

• BVerfG Spielhallen 2017 is the Federal Constitutional Court decision of 7 March 2017 (1 BvR 1314/12 and others) on arcades, status judgment.
• OVG NRW Spielhallen-Auswahlverfahren covers North Rhine-Westphalia selection procedures for arcades, decisions from 2017 to 2022, status judgment.

Questions people ask

What did the Federal Administrative Court decide about Berlin's arcade law?

On 16 December 2016 it upheld the Spielhallengesetz Berlin, including the ban on multi-site complexes, the 500 m minimum distance and the five-year transition for existing arcades.

Which docket numbers belong to the Berlin arcade decisions?

The lead case is 8 C 6.15. Related dockets are 8 C 7.15, 8 C 8.15, 8 C 4.16 (Rheinland-Pfalz), 8 C 5.16 and 8 C 8.16, with 8 C 16.16 as a companion on transition protection.

Is there compensation for arcade operators or players?

No. The operators lost and no damages or fund exist. Filing a settlement claim is free where a claim exists, but none exists here. GamblingLawsuits.org is not a law firm and not a claims administrator.