- Status
- Judgment entered (judgment)
- As of
- 13 Apr 2017 · read from the court record
- Court
- Gerecht in eerste aanleg van Curaçao (Court of First Instance of Curaçao) - Landsverordening administratieve rechtspraak (Lar) · First instance
- Docket
- Lar Cur201700120 and Cur201700121
- Judge
- D. Haan
- Filed
- 2017
- Type
- Operator v. regulator, licensing and administrative court cases
- Money
- costs NAf 1,400 and court fee NAf 150 to the claimant
- Payout
- No payout exists as of 14 Nov 2026
Status words follow the court record: a complaint states one side's allegations, only the court's orders decide anything. Filing a settlement claim is always free.
What this case is about
The court upheld the licence refusal because the hotel had 70 rooms against the 150 required by the Landsverordening Casinowezen, but found the immediate closure order disproportionate for its short compliance period and set a new deadline of 15 May 2017. A compact statement of the statutory conditions for land-based casino licences in Curaçao.
What this case is about
Emmazicht N.V. v Gaming Control Board is a judgment of the Gerecht in eerste aanleg van Curaçao (Court of First Instance of Curaçao) dated 13 April 2017, dockets Lar Cur201700120 and Cur201700121 (ECLI:NL:OGEAC:2017:215).
Emmazicht N.V. appealed against the refusal of a casino licence for the Howard Johnson Plaza hotel and against a closure order. It is one of the Licensing and Administrative Court Cases in Curaçao.
The defendant was Stichting Gaming Control Board, acting for the Minister of Finance. The application of 16 December 2015 was refused on 13 January 2017 because the hotel had 70 rooms against the 150-room requirement for casino hotels.
The closure order is dated 10 February 2017, and the Board closed the casino on 17 February 2017.
Who is covered
The ruling affects Emmazicht N.V. and the Gaming Control Board. It also states the statutory conditions that a land-based casino licence applicant in Curaçao must meet, including the 150-room minimum.
Players are not parties. Judge D. Haan decided the case. Counsel for Emmazicht were A.C. Small and D.M. Wildeman, and counsel for the Board were M.R. Hammoud and A. Bakhuis. For other cases in the territory, see Gambling Lawsuits in Curaçao.
Is there a payout?
No payout exists in this case. The record shows no fund, no claim process and no money for players.
The only money is costs: NAf 1,400 and a court fee of NAf 150 to the claimant, Emmazicht N.V.
What the court decided
On 13 April 2017 the court held the appeal against the licence refusal unfounded, because the hotel had 70 rooms against the 150 required. The refusal stood.
The court annulled the closure order only as to the one-week compliance period. It found the immediate closure disproportionate for that short period and set a new deadline of 15 May 2017. As of 14 November 2026 the record lists no later step.
Why it matters
The judgment is a compact statement of the room-count condition for land-based casino licences in Curaçao. It shows that a court upheld a hard statutory minimum for the hotel.
It also shows that a closure order must give a proportionate compliance period. The wider group is in Licensing and Administrative Court Cases: Operators Against Regulators and States.
Related cases
- Hotelmaatschappij Otrobanda N.V. v Stichting Gaming Control Board (GL-CW-0022), on a casino operating without a renewed licence, is dismissed. Hotelmaatschappij Otrobanda v Gaming Control Board
Questions people ask
Why was the casino licence refused?
The hotel had 70 rooms against the 150-room requirement. The Gaming Control Board refused the application on 13 January 2017, and the court upheld the refusal on 13 April 2017.
Was the closure order also upheld?
Only in part. The court annulled it as to the one-week compliance period and set a new deadline of 15 May 2017.
Who paid the costs?
The claimant received costs of NAf 1,400 and a court fee of NAf 150, per the judgment.
Who is involved
Plaintiffs: Emmazicht N.V.
| Defendants | Stichting Gaming Control Board, for the Minister of Finance |
|---|---|
| Class counsel | A.C. Small; D.M. Wildeman |
| Defense counsel | M.R. Hammoud; A. Bakhuis |
| Judge | D. Haan |
| Claims |
|
If you need a lawyer, start with the court-appointed class counsel named above or the bar association referral service of your state or country. This site does not refer readers to law firms.
Is there a payout?
No payout exists in this case as of 14 Nov 2026. The court record shows costs NAf 1,400 and court fee NAf 150 to the claimant.
What happens next
No future date is on the record we hold. The case is closed on the record we hold; later appeals or enforcement steps would be added here.
Timeline
2 dated steps on record, oldest first. Future dates come from court notices and can move.
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2017 | Filed |
| 13 Apr 2017 | Judgment entered |
Documents and sources
1 primary source (court file, administrator notice, regulator) and 0 secondary. Press is supporting evidence only.
- Docket: uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl
| What it supports | Source | Type | Retrieved |
|---|---|---|---|
| judgment 13 April 2017, Lar Cur201700120 and 121: decisions, 150-room requirement, operative part; 13 April 2017, Lar Cur201700120 and -121, judge D. Haan, Emmazicht N.V. (Small/Wildeman) v GCB for the Minister (Hammoud/Bakhuis); application of 16 December 2015 refused 13 January 2017 (70 rooms against the 150-room requirement of the Landsbesluit Casinowezen), closure order 10 February 2017 (closure by GCB 17 February 2017); appeal against refusal unfounded, closure order annulled only as to the one-week compliance period, new deadline 15 May 2017; costs NAf 1,400 and court fee NAf 150 | uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl | primary | 14 Nov 2026 |
Related cases
1 case in the record share parties, claims or a settlement with this one.
| Case | Court | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Otrobanda casino v GCB | Gemeenschappelijk Hof van Justitie van Aruba, Curaçao, Sint Maarten en van Bonaire, Sint Eustatius en Saba (Joint Court of Justice) | Dismissed |
Last checked against the sources on 14 Nov 2026. Found an error? Tell us and we correct the record with a dated note.