The Paraíba Court of Appeals has upheld a nationwide suspension of the betting platform Pixbet Soluções Tecnológicas Ltda, following a decision by acting judge Adílson Fabrício. In a recent ruling, the judge reviewed an interlocutory appeal submitted by Pixbet and denied the company’s request to suspend the execution of the initial decision. This maintains the preliminary injunction originally issued by the Campina Grande Court for Children and Youth, which mandated the platform's suspension due to its failure to implement adequate age verification mechanisms.
This suspension stems from a public civil action initiated by the Padre Ezequiel Ramin Human Rights Defence Centre and Educafro Brasil, and it will remain in effect until Pixbet can demonstrate that it has established effective technological protocols. Specifically, the court requires the use of facial recognition with liveness detection for every login and financial transaction to ensure that minors cannot access the platform.
In their appeal, Pixbet argued that it already utilizes a facial biometrics system and complies with both federal laws and the regulations stipulated by the Secretariat of Prizes and Bets (SPA). The company contended that the lower court's order was an overreach, arguing that it exceeded the jurisdictional authority of the federal regulator and that the court lacked the power to impose restrictions across the entire country.
Judge Fabrício responded by emphasizing the importance of constitutional safeguards for children and adolescents, noting that such protections take precedence over private business interests. He highlighted the judiciary's responsibility to implement preventative measures wherever there is a potential risk to minors.
The ruling pointed out that online betting platforms must ensure robust security measures to prevent minors from gaining access. The judge expressed concerns that even potential malfunctions in age verification systems indicate an inadequacy in the service provision. He noted that having technical certifications does not guarantee the infallibility of these mechanisms.
The court also cited the precautionary principle, asserting that the potential for harm—prompted by exposing minors to risk—is sufficient justification for urgent protective action. The judge clarified that it is not necessary to provide evidence of actual harm to justify such urgent measures.
Additionally, the decision addressed Pixbet’s argument regarding jurisdiction, affirming that the Children and Youth Court of Campina Grande was indeed competent to issue a ruling of nationwide scope due to the national implications of both the harm alleged and the company's operations. "The Children and Youth Court of Campina Grande, Paraíba, therefore had jurisdiction to issue a nationwide ruling, given that the alleged harm (and the company’s activity) is national in scope," the ruling specified.
Ultimately, while the interlocutory appeal was accepted for review, the request to stay the execution was denied. The judge concluded that halting the suspension could result in serious and irreparable harm to children and youth. He indicated, "There is no likelihood of the appeal succeeding, whereas suspending the contested decision could cause serious and irreparable harm to children and youth." The suspension remains in force until Pixbet can prove it has implemented suitable age verification measures.
