Adílson Fabrício, an acting judge, has affirmed the suspension of operations for the betting platform Pixbet Soluções Tecnológicas Ltda across Brazil. In response to an interlocutory appeal submitted by the company, the judge refused to grant a stay on the suspension, upholding the preliminary injunction initially issued by the Campina Grande Court for Children and Youth.
This injunction stems from a public civil action undertaken by the Padre Ezequiel Ramin Human Rights Defence Centre and Educafro Brasil. The ruling mandates Pixbet's suspension until the platform can prove the implementation of effective technological measures for age verification, such as facial recognition accompanied by liveness detection for every user login and financial transaction.
In its defense, Pixbet argued that it already utilizes a facial biometrics system and complies with federal laws as well as regulations from the Secretariat of Prizes and Bets (SPA). The company further contended that the lower court's ruling was an overreach that infringed upon federal jurisdiction and that the court lacked the authority to apply such a nationwide suspension.
The magistrate countered these arguments, emphasizing that constitutional protections for children and adolescents take precedence over private economic interests. He asserted that preventive actions must be taken whenever there is potential risk to minors.
Fabrício noted that the nature of online betting necessitates stringent security measures to prevent minors from accessing these services. He stated that even potential failures in verification measures indicate defects in the service provided. The existence of technical certifications, he determined, does not guarantee the faultlessness of the systems employed by the platform.
The precautionary principle played a significant role in the ruling. The judge argued that the mere risk presented to children and adolescents justifies urgent legal action, arguing that actual harm need not be proven.
The decision also dismissed claims that the Campina Grande Court lacked the jurisdiction to enact a ruling with national implications. The judge observed that since the company's activities and the alleged harm are national in scope, the Children and Youth Court of Campina Grande had the authority to issue such a ruling in accordance with Article 93, II, of the Consumer Protection Code (CDC).
Despite admitting the interlocutory appeal for review, he denied the request for a stay of execution, maintaining the suspension until substantial age verification mechanisms are established. The ruling concluded, citing the absence of likelihood that the appeal would succeed while emphasizing that lifting the suspension could cause serious and irreparable harm to children and youth.
