A judge from the Paraíba Court of Appeals, Adílson Fabrício, has confirmed the decision to suspend the operations of Pixbet Soluções Tecnológicas Ltda across Brazil. In addressing the company's interlocutory appeal, the judge declined to grant a stay of execution and upheld the preliminary injunction previously issued by the Campina Grande Court for Children and Youth, which mandated Pixbet's suspension.
This initial ruling stemmed from a public civil action brought forward by the Padre Ezequiel Ramin Human Rights Defence Centre and Educafro Brasil. The court's decision requires Pixbet to remain suspended until it can properly implement technological measures for age verification, including facial recognition with liveness detection for all logins and financial transactions.
Pixbet, in its appeal, argued that it has already established a facial biometrics system and complied with federal legislation as well as the regulations of the Secretariat of Prizes and Bets (SPA). Additionally, the company contended that the lower court's ruling went beyond its legal authority, overstepped the jurisdiction of the federal regulator, and was made by a court without the power to issue a nationwide suspension.
In his ruling, Judge Fabrício emphasized that the protection of children and adolescents, as guaranteed by the Constitution and the Statute of the Child and Adolescent, surpasses private economic interests. He stated that the judiciary must enforce preventive measures whenever children and young people are at risk.
The judge highlighted the necessity for stringent security measures to prevent minors from accessing online betting platforms. He reasoned that even a potential failure in these verification systems represents a defect in service provision. Furthermore, he pointed out that technical certifications do not ensure that the platform's systems are infallible.
The precautionary principle was also a key factor in his decision. He argued that when protecting children and adolescents, the risk of potential harm is sufficient grounds to justify urgent legal intervention without the need for evidence of actual harm occurring.
Regarding jurisdiction, Judge Fabrício addressed concerns about the Campina Grande Court's authority to impose a nationwide ruling, reaffirming that it was appropriate due to the national scope of the company's activities and the alleged harm, as outlined in Article 93, II, of the Consumer Protection Code (CDC).
Ultimately, the judge accepted the interlocutory appeal for review but did not grant the request for a stay of execution, maintaining the nationwide suspension of Pixbet. This suspension will remain in place until the company demonstrates effective mechanisms to control access for minors. "There is no likelihood of the appeal succeeding, whereas suspending the contested decision could cause serious and irreparable harm to children and youth," the ruling stated. As such, the requirements for a stay of execution were found unmet under Articles 995 (sole paragraph) and 1,019, I, of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).
