- Status
- Judgment entered (judgment)
- As of
- 19 Jul 2018 · read from the court record
- Court
- Grondwettelijk Hof / Cour constitutionnelle · Supreme or high court
- Docket
- rolnummers 6510-6512 (129/2017); 6881 (108/2018)
- Filed
- 2016
- Type
- Constitutional challenge, licensing and administrative court cases
- Money
- No settlement fund or award on record
- 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
On a question from the Council of State, the Constitutional Court held on 9 November 2017 that the Gambling Act breaches equality in so far as it does not prohibit cumulating additional licences of different classes (A+, B+, F1+) for casino games, arcade games and betting through one domain name, when the same cumulation is forbidden for physical venues. On 19 July 2018 (108/2018) it annulled the Act to that extent, and an interpretation judgment of 13 October 2022 (122/2022) clarified the scope; judgment 114/2021 (16 September 2021) extended the ban to a single holder. The rulings forced Belgian online operators to split brands per licence class.
What this case is about
The Rocoluc case (rolnummers 6510-6512, decided as 129/2017, and 6881, decided as 108/2018) is a Belgian Constitutional Court challenge by casino operator nv Rocoluc, filed in 2016, to the Gambling Act of 7 May 1999. The court asked whether it was equal treatment to forbid cumulating licence classes in physical venues but not online.
The claim rested on arts. 10 and 11 of the Constitution (equality) and arts. 4, 6, 34, 43/4 and 43/8 of the Act.
The matter came on a question from the Council of State of 13 September 2016 (nrs. 235.744-235.746). It belongs with the other Licensing and Administrative Court Cases on judicial review of gambling regulators.
Who is covered
The plaintiff was nv Rocoluc, a casino operator; the defendants were the Kansspelcommissie and the Ministerraad. The rulings affect Belgian online operators holding additional licences of different classes (A+, B+, F1+).
For the regulator's other cases, see Kansspelcommissie Lawsuits.
Is there a payout?
No payout exists in this case. It was a constitutional review of a statute brought by an operator, and the record shows no fund, damages or claim process for players.
Filing a settlement claim is free wherever a claim exists, but none exists here. GamblingLawsuits.org is not a law firm and not a claims administrator.
What the court decided
On 9 November 2017 (129/2017) the Court held that the Gambling Act breaches equality in so far as it does not prohibit cumulating additional licences of different classes (A+, B+, F1+) for casino games, arcade games and betting through one domain name, when the same cumulation is forbidden for physical venues.
On 19 July 2018 (108/2018) it annulled the Act to that extent. A judgment of 13 October 2022 (122/2022) clarified the scope, and judgment 114/2021 of 16 September 2021 extended the ban to a single holder.
As of 14 November 2026 these rulings stand. They forced Belgian online operators to split brands per licence class, and the national overview sits under Gambling Lawsuits in Belgium.
Why it matters
The rulings applied the equality principle from land-based venues to online gambling. They set the rule that one domain cannot carry several licence classes, a structural limit on how Belgian operators build their offers.
A later Council of State case shows the same parties still litigating licences: Rocoluc and Fremoluc v. Belgian State and Kansspelcommissie.
Questions people ask
What did the Belgian Constitutional Court rule about licence cumulation?
The Court held that the Gambling Act breaches equality by not banning cumulation of A+, B+ and F1+ licences through one domain name. It annulled the Act to that extent on 19 July 2018.
Did the ban apply only to the one company?
No. Judgment 114/2021 of 16 September 2021 extended the ban to a single holder of the licences.
Related cases
- Rocoluc and Fremoluc v. Belgian State and Kansspelcommissie: Council of State, 11 December 2024, arrest nr. 261.713, status dismissed.
- Constitutional Court 34/2018: 22 March 2018 ruling on VAT on online gambling.
Who is involved
Plaintiffs: nv Rocoluc (casino operator)
| Defendants | Kansspelcommissie; Ministerraad |
|---|---|
| Claims |
|
Is there a payout?
No payout exists in this case as of 14 Nov 2026.
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 |
|---|---|
| 2016 | Filed |
| 19 Jul 2018 | Judgment entered |
Documents and sources
3 primary sources (court file, administrator notice, regulator) and 1 secondary. Press is supporting evidence only.
- Court document: nl.const-court.be
- Court document: nl.const-court.be
| What it supports | Source | Type | Retrieved |
|---|---|---|---|
| arrest 129/2017, 9 Nov 2017, question from RvS arresten 235.744-746 of 13 Sept 2016, holding | nl.const-court.be | primary | 14 Nov 2026 |
| arrest 108/2018, 19 July 2018, annulment | nl.const-court.be | primary | 14 Nov 2026 |
| arrest 122/2022, 13 Oct 2022, interpretation | const-court.be | primary | 14 Nov 2026 |
| arrest 114/2021, 16 Sept 2021 (single holder) | stibbe.com | secondary | 14 Nov 2026 |
Related cases
2 cases in the record share parties, claims or a settlement with this one.
| Case | Court | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Council of State upholds Unibet casino A+ licence | Raad van State, afdeling bestuursrechtspraak | Dismissed |
| Constitutional Court annuls VAT on online gambling (2018) | Grondwettelijk Hof / Cour constitutionnelle | Judgment entered |
Last checked against the sources on 14 Nov 2026. Found an error? Tell us and we correct the record with a dated note.