The Federal Regional Court of the 3rd Region (TRF-3) has reinstated restrictions on Stake's operations in Brazil, suspending a prior decision that allowed the online betting platform to function until October 25. Judge Luis Antonio Johonsom di Salvo made this ruling on Friday, responding to a request from the Attorney General's Office (AGU). This came just a day after a preliminary injunction from Federal Judge Cristiane Farias Rodrigues dos Santos had granted Stake permission to continue operating until late October.
As a result, Stake is once again prohibited from conducting business in Brazil. The AGU's appeal highlighted that the injunction provided Stake with an unwarranted competitive advantage over other betting companies. The judge supported this view, noting that the prior authorization led to inequality in regulatory practices and may encourage others to seek similar exemptions.
In his ruling, Judge Johonsom di Salvo stated, “In this case, I consider the evidence of serious harm to administrative public order to be sufficiently established.”
Although Stake opposed the AGU's request to TRF-3, the court did not rule in its favor. Notably, the injunction granted a partial allowance, as Stake's request to operate until December 31, 2029—the expiration date of its initial license—was denied by the 9th Federal Civil Court of São Paulo.
The suspension will remain in place until a definitive conclusion is reached or until a new ruling is issued by the court's presidency. This latest decision from TRF-3 eliminates Stake's chance to operate for an additional 16 days.
Consequently, federal agencies are now empowered to enact measures to restrict and block Stake's operations, in alignment with a provisional measure introduced by Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva late last month. Judge Johonsom di Salvo pointed out that Stake’s authorization perpetuated regulatory imbalance, which could undermine the consistent application of public policy.
The ruling furthermore emphasized the necessity to safeguard bettors amid concerns regarding the transparency of online gambling mechanics. It’s important to note that this ruling does not address the substantive issues at hand nor does it evaluate the constitutionality of the provisional measure, which has faced scrutiny from two significant gambling trade organizations in Brazil that have brought legal challenges before the Supreme Federal Court.
