Lower Austria slot licence annulled (VwGH 2016): Allegations, Court Orders and Status

What this case is about

VwGH, Erkenntnis vom 11.05.2016, 2013/02/0094, is a judgment of the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria's Supreme Administrative Court) that annulled the award of the Lower Austrian machine-gambling licence to Admiral, the Novomatic group company. The case began in 2013.

It is one of the Licensing and Administrative Court Cases in which competitors challenge how a regulator awarded a licence. A competing applicant complained against the decision of the Niederösterreichische Landesregierung of 8 March 2012.

That decision granted Admiral permits for 1,339 machines for 15 years. The legal basis was the NÖ Spielautomatengesetz, and the complaint concerned file access (Akteneinsicht) and the right to be heard (Parteiengehör).

Who is covered

The ruling concerns the competing applicants, the Lower Austrian state government and Admiral as licence holder. It does not involve players.

Its effect was on one licence: the machine permit for Lower Austria. The ruling is a judgment between competitors and the state, and it creates no class or group claim. For the wider national picture, see gambling lawsuits in Austria.

Is there a payout?

No payout exists in this case. It is a licensing dispute decided on procedure, and the record shows no fund, no damages award and no claim process.

What the court decided

On 11 May 2016 the VwGH annulled the Landesregierung's decision because competitors were refused access to the file before it was made. The court's reason was transparency in the award procedure, not a finding about who deserved the licence.

Annulment did not stop Admiral operating. According to press reports, Admiral kept running 1,339 machines under an 18-month run-off rule and then received a new permit dated 26 September 2016. The same reports say the Landesgericht St. Pölten treated the annulment as irrelevant in Novomatic's unfair-competition (UWG) suits.

The status is judgment as of 14 November 2026. The company's wider history is on the Novomatic lawsuits page.

Why it matters

The decision shows that an Austrian licence can fall on procedure alone: refusing competitors access to the file was enough to annul a 15-year permit. It also shows the limits of such a win, since the licence holder continued to operate through the run-off period and a replacement permit.

More decisions of this type are collected under operators against regulators and states.

Questions people ask

Why did the VwGH annul the Lower Austria licence?

Competitors were refused access to the file before the Landesregierung decided. The VwGH treated that as a procedural defect in the award.

Did Admiral have to stop its machines?

Press reports say no. Admiral kept operating 1,339 machines under an 18-month run-off rule and got a new permit dated 26 September 2016.

Who brought the complaint?

A competing applicant for the licence, shown anonymized in the court text, complained against the Landesregierung's decision of 8 March 2012.

Related cases

• BVwG W139 2010508-1/71E and VwGH Ra 2015/17/0082 (casino concessions, 2015 and 2016): Austrian casino concession rulings in the same year, status judgment.
• Novomatic/Admiral UWG suits against Kajot operators, OLG Linz 3 R 59/16s and 3 R 60/16p: the unfair-competition suits mentioned above, status judgment.