Gambling Lawsuits in Curaçao: Every Case, Court and Settlement

6 Curaçao gambling court cases are on record as of 14 November 2026, 6 of them read from the published judgments, and they answer a question the island's reputation does not: a Curaçao master license holder was liable in tort for its sub-licensees' unpaid winnings (Hoge Raad, 20 December 2024), Austrian and German refund judgments are enforced there (twelve Joint Court judgments of 10 March 2026), and the Joint Court has since drawn the limits.

Does a Curaçao seal on a casino site mean anything in court? It does, in three lines of cases: players' claims for winnings and losses, bankruptcies obtained by a players' foundation against operators and a master license holder, and a few regulator cases.

All of them now sit under the Landsverordening op de kansspelen (LOK), in force since 24 December 2024. The Court of First Instance, the Joint Court and the Hoge Raad publish their decisions on rechtspraak.nl, so every status on this page can be traced to a named judgment and date.

Dates and ECLIs from rechtspraak.nl; checked 14 November 2026.

Can players recover losses in Curaçao? What the courts have decided

No claim process, settlement fund or class payout exists in Curaçao: players have won individual judgments, for withheld winnings since 2022 and for losses since 2026, and three of the largest first-instance awards were reversed by the Joint Court in December 2025, July 2026 and August 2026.

A petition states one side's claim, only the judgment decides, and in Curaçao the judgment is public. The wider record sits in gambling lawsuits by country.

The table lists eight matters with their sums, each a judgment amount and not a fund. The one settlement on record is EUR 85,000, paid by Game Tech Group N.V. (Osiris) within the Cyberluck liability case; every other sum is an award a player still has to collect from the operator or its estate.

Three things decide whether an award becomes money: whether the defendant is the operator or the master license holder, whether the court holds the player bound by the casino's terms, and whether the defendant still has assets in Curaçao.

Winnings: the master license liability doctrine and its limits

The Hoge Raad held on 20 December 2024 (ECLI:NL:HR:2024:1910) that Cyberluck Curaçao N.V., which sub-licensed hundreds of casinos, took monthly fees and did not supervise payouts, is liable alongside the casino for a Turkish player's TRY 620,000 of unpaid Bahsine winnings, and the Court of First Instance applied the same rule against Antillephone for HUF 183,588,499.88 (about EUR 480,000) in a Hungarian player's case.

The doctrine rests on a special duty of care of the license holder toward players, arts. 6:162 and 6:76 of the Civil Code (BW).

Two rules came earlier. Articles 7A:1807 to 7A:1810 BW, which make gaming debts non-actionable, do not apply to licensed online gaming, and Curaçao law governs under the license conditions. Terms that were not made available to the player are voidable (Gerecht, 13 June 2022, ECLI:NL:OGEAC:2022:193; Joint Court, 23 May 2023, ECLI:NL:OGHACMB:2023:68).

The Joint Court then set three limits, and in the GSP case held that the establishment rule applies to license holders only:

• No duty after the sub-license ends: GSP/topbet.eu, 16 December 2025 (ECLI:NL:OGHACMB:2025:331), reversing a USD 123,000 award and ordering the Maryland player to pay Cg 4,000 plus Cg 17,181.45.
• Bonus conditions are core terms: Santeda/MyStake, 28 July 2026 (ECLI:NL:OGHACMB:2026:249), reversing EUR 246,500, and the GSP bitcoin claim of 18 August 2026 (ECLI:NL:OGHACMB:2026:259), dismissed against GSP.
• Tick-box terms bind the player: Webbyslot, 28 July 2026 (ECLI:NL:OGHACMB:2026:237), reversing EUR 65,000.

What stands: GLD Group's EUR 66,400 (ECLI:NL:OGEAC:2023:297), Parimatch's USD 19,630 (ECLI:NL:OGEAC:2023:380), SmokeAce's EUR 495,454.98 as reported by trade press, and the Betswagger claims, which are on appeal. The general question is covered in can you sue a casino that refuses to pay.

Losses: Austrian and German refund judgments enforced in Curaçao, and the first duty-of-care award

Curaçao's courts do what Malta's courts are reported to refuse: since the Araxio rulings (Joint Court, 23 May 2023; Hoge Raad, 1 March 2024, ECLI:NL:HR:2024:295) Austrian and German judgments voiding unlicensed online gambling contracts and ordering stakes back are recognized and enforced against Curaçao operators.

On 10 March 2026 the Joint Court confirmed twelve such judgments against Raging Rhino N.V. in one sitting, among them a first-instance award of EUR 464,460 plus 4 percent interest. The Austrian and German side is covered in online casino refund litigation in Germany and Austria.

Recognition follows art. 431(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure (RvC) and the Gazprombank criteria, with no review of the merits. The twelve confirmed Raging Rhino judgments run from first-instance orders of 26 August 2024 to 26 May 2025, with appeal costs of Cg 7,500 per case.

For German judgments, the Court of First Instance granted leave on 10 November 2025 to enforce a Landgericht Osnabrück judgment of 12 December 2023 (11 O 1286/23, ECLI:NL:OGEAC:2025:335) and on 23 March 2026 ordered performance of a pair of 2024 German judgments (ECLI:NL:OGEAC:2026:94); the German amounts and any appeals are not confirmed in the court record.

Maltese decisions as reported by press and law-firm sources; Curaçao decisions read from rechtspraak.nl; checked 14 November 2026.

The first loss award on a duty-of-care basis came on 25 May 2026 (ECLI:NL:OGEAC:2026:185): USD 143,958 of the USD 162,226 a player lost after the casino ignored closure requests, ordered jointly against LFG Gaming N.V. and Gaming Services Provider N.V.; an appeal is not confirmed.

Malta's courts are reported to have refused or suspended enforcement in every case since June 2023, judgments not read; see gambling lawsuits in Malta.

Class actions and mass claims: SBGOK's assignment model and the bankruptcy lever

There is no class action in Curaçao; the mass claim is a foundation, Stichting Belangenbehartiging Gedupeerden Online Kansspelen (SBGOK), which takes assignment of players' claims against Curaçao-licensed casinos and master license holders, sues on them and, when judgments go unpaid, petitions for the operator's bankruptcy. A petition for bankruptcy is a creditor's lever, not a payout.

Players with judgments rank as unsecured creditors once an operator is bankrupt. Cyberluck itself was declared bankrupt on 18 October 2024 over the unpaid EUR 66,400 GLD judgment; per the trustee's first report as summarized by trade press, player claims were EUR 256,400 and TRY 2,900,000, sub-licensee claims EUR 56,166.67, and its balance sheet was nil.

The same report is reported to describe the license business as outsourced since 2019 because Cyberluck could not hold a bank account, with an agreed annual fee of USD 240,000 never paid. The company's own record is on Cyberluck Curaçao N.V. lawsuits.

The model has held up before: assignment to the foundation was upheld in ECLI:NL:OGEAC:2022:193 and ECLI:NL:OGHACMB:2023:31. The Lock Poker estate (Stacktrace N.V., bankrupt 8 May 2015) won a Joint Court judgment on 14 April 2020 making Cyberluck and Carmanco N.V. liable for the estate deficit, which a trustee report summarized by trade press puts at USD 1,048,783.

For BC.Game, claims over USD 2.1 million were filed, and the trustee sought a reversal in 2025. Dama shows the other side: the Joint Court set its bankruptcy aside on 30 July 2024 after reviewing the position as of its own decision.

The model carries an open question. On 24 March 2026 the Joint Court asked the parties in the Betswagger appeal whether the general terms were validly incorporated and whether contractual bans on assigning claims bind SBGOK; the final judgment is not confirmed in the court record.

Regulator cases in court: the Gaming Control Board, the fee doubling and the LOK

Regulator cases are few and administrative: the one published challenge by a master license holder succeeded on form when the Court of First Instance quashed the Minister of Finance's doubling of the monthly license fee from NAf 10,000 to NAf 20,000 on 12 April 2022 (ECLI:NL:OGEAC:2022:161) for careless preparation and missing reasons, while Cyberluck's request to suspend a Gaming Control Board decision of 29 July 2024 was refused for lack of urgency on 23 September 2024, weeks before its bankruptcy.

One further first-instance ruling shows how the courts treat the sites. On 10 September 2024 the Court of First Instance ordered Black Hawk Technology B.V. and GSP to hand over a self-excluded player's betting history and chats within seven days, with a penalty of NAf 5,000 per day up to NAf 100,000 (ECLI:NL:OGEAC:2024:205).

The land-based cases and the raffle are old and small. The LOK, in force from 24 December 2024, names the Stichting Gaming Control Board as the Curaçao Gaming Authority in its Art. 15.2, and license disputes now run against it; see licensing and administrative court cases.

Criminal complaints about the provisional-license process were filed with the Public Prosecutor in November and December 2024, as reported by trade press; the record shows complaints filed and no court judgment.

Hoge Raad and Joint Court rulings: the timeline

The Hoge Raad has decided 1 Curaçao gambling matters, all for the players' side or the press (1XCorp bankruptcy, 20 January 2023; Cramm, 22 December 2023; Araxio, 1 March 2024; Cyberluck liability, 20 December 2024), and the Joint Court has since narrowed the first-instance line while confirming the enforcement of Austrian judgments in twelve.

The Hoge Raad rows decide liability, bankruptcy and press freedom, and the Joint Court rows are appeals from the Court of First Instance.

In the Cramm line the Joint Court held on 11 October 2022 that a journalist may call the sub-licensing model illegal, the Hoge Raad dismissed Cyberluck's cassation appeals on 22 December 2023, and the Joint Court rejected rectification again on 20 May 2025. Cassation and further appeals are collected in pending appeals and high court gambling cases.

First-instance outcomes: the statistics

The 6 records split into 3 player or press cases, 3 administrative cases and 0 appeals, with 3 judgments, 3 dismissals and 0 appeal pending, and 6 read from the published decision.

The Joint Court handled sixteen online-gaming appeals together through interim judgments of 25 March and 17 June 2025 (ECLI:NL:OGHACMB:2025:330). It has reversed license-holder liability in three published judgments while upholding player claims in one, and confirmed twelve Raging Rhino judgments on 10 March 2026.

A win rate is not available and is not estimated; the series shows a tightening on terms and conditions, not a reversal of the enforcement of foreign judgments.

Cases by category

The smaller categories sit alongside the player money cases. The duty-of-care cases are the LFG award and the GSP records order, the advertising case is a summary-proceedings ruling of 29 May 2023 (ECLI:NL:OGEAC:2023:118) that casino ratings are advertising under art. 6:194 BW, the lottery case is the 2019 house raffle, and the trademark case is Spribe's, which rests on trade press.

Player money cases make up 2 of the 6 records, followed by licensing and administrative matters (3), duty-of-care cases (0) and the advertising, lottery and trademark cases.

Courts, registers and how to read a Curaçao citation

A Curaçao judgment is cited by its ECLI: ECLI:NL:OGEAC:2026:185 is the Gerecht in eerste aanleg van Curaçao's (Court of First Instance) 185th published decision of 2026, ECLI:NL:OGHACMB:2026:204 a Joint Court of Justice (Gemeenschappelijk Hof van Justitie) decision and ECLI:NL:HR:2024:1910 a Hoge Raad (Supreme Court of the Netherlands) decision, and all three are on rechtspraak.nl in Dutch.

Three citation elements recur:

• The ECLI prefix names the court: OGEAC for the Gerecht, OGHACMB for the Joint Court, HR for the Hoge Raad.
• Case numbers run CUR202302650 (first instance), CUR2024H00236 (appeal) and HR 23/02271 (cassation).
• Two procedures matter: the Lar, an administrative appeal, and the kort geding, summary proceedings.

The register on rechtspraak.nl is complete for published decisions, and four records rest on press because the decision is unpublished or could not be located. The Hoge Raad sits as the cassation court for Curaçao, which is why its rulings appear here and on the page for gambling lawsuits in the Netherlands.

Every case we track

The table lists all 6 Curaçao cases in the record as of 14 November 2026 with court, case number, ECLI where published, status and its date, and marks the records that rest on press because the judgment is not on rechtspraak.nl.

The same rows download as CSV from open data. A record resting on press carries that label in its source column, and a status is only as old as the date shown beside it.

Questions people ask

Why are online casinos registered in Curaçao?

Because from 1993 to 2024 four master license holders could sub-license any number of casinos anywhere without state supervision, which is what the Joint Court in 2022 let a journalist call illegal and the Hoge Raad in 2024 made the basis of the license holders' liability; the LOK ended master licenses on 24 December 2024 and licensing cases now run against the Curaçao Gaming Authority. See licensing and administrative court cases: operators against regulators.

Can I get my money back from a Curaçao-licensed casino?

Withheld winnings: yes in principle, by suing the operator and, for the sub-license period, the master license holder in Curaçao, where the record shows awards from USD 19,630 to EUR 495,454.98 but also three large reversals on bonus and account terms in 2025 and 2026; losses: only with a foreign refund judgment to enforce or, since 25 May 2026, on proof that the casino ignored closure requests. Country by country, see can you get gambling losses back, country by country.

Is Cyberluck still liable for its sub-licensees' debts?

Liable yes, collectible no: the Hoge Raad confirmed Cyberluck's liability on 20 December 2024, but the company has been bankrupt since 18 October 2024 with a balance sheet reported at nil, so players with judgments rank as unsecured creditors in an empty estate. The cases are listed under Cyberluck's cases.

Can an Austrian or German refund judgment be enforced in Curaçao?

Yes: the Joint Court confirmed twelve Austrian judgments against Raging Rhino on 10 March 2026 and the Court of First Instance granted leave to enforce German judgments on 10 November 2025 and 23 March 2026, the opposite of the Maltese courts' reported Article 56A refusals. The Maltese side is explained in Malta Bill 55 (Article 56A Gaming Act).

What this page does not cover

Complaints to the Curaçao Gaming Authority, lists of licensed operators, license checks and the island's anti-money-laundering ratings are outside this site's border, which covers court cases, as are questions about the best or biggest casino. The EU-level questions about recognizing such judgments are decided in gambling lawsuits in the European Union (CJEU).

The German and Austrian judgments themselves are covered on the German pages; an OLG Braunschweig ruling of 15 January 2026 against a Curaçao operator (10 U 13/25) is reported there, and we have not read it. See why German courts order online casinos to refund losses.

Sources and method

Of the 6 cases on this page, 6 carry a status read from the published judgment on rechtspraak.nl; the others (Cyberluck's bankruptcy, Small House, SmokeAce and Spribe) rest on trade press because the decisions are unpublished or could not be located, and each is marked in the table.

Primary sources are the rechtspraak.nl ECLIs cited above and the text of the LOK on gobiernu.cw; trade press (NEXT.io for the Cyberluck and BC.Game bankruptcies, Curaçao Chronicle and CasinoBeats for SmokeAce) is named as such.

GamblingLawsuits.org is a non-profit reference. Filing a claim is free, we are not a law firm and not a claims administrator, and nothing here refers readers to an operator or a law firm. Read how every case is sourced and checked in our methodology, and report errors on the corrections page.