A ruling by acting judge Adílson Fabrício has confirmed the nationwide suspension of the betting platform Pixbet Soluções Tecnológicas Ltda. The decision follows a review of an interlocutory appeal filed by the company, which sought to block the previous order. The judge upheld the preliminary injunction initially issued by the Campina Grande Court for Children and Youth, mandating the suspension until Picbet shows it has implemented reliable age verification systems.
This original order stemmed from a public civil action initiated by the Padre Ezequiel Ramin Human Rights Defence Centre and Educafro Brasil. The court insists that Pixbet must utilize effective technological measures to ensure age verification, including facial recognition technology that incorporates liveness detection for each login and financial transaction.
In its defense, Pixbet asserted that it already has a facial biometrics system in place and complies with federal laws and the regulations set forth by the Secretariat of Prizes and Bets (SPA). Additionally, the company claimed that the lower court's ruling overstepped legal boundaries, intruded on the powers of the federal regulator, and was issued by a court lacking authority to enforce such a sweeping measure.
Judge Fabrício underscored the Constitution's and the Statute of the Child and Adolescent's mandate to prioritize the protection of minors over commercial interests. He noted that the judiciary has an obligation to take preventive actions whenever there is potential harm to children and youth.
The judge stressed the necessity for high-level security in online betting to prevent access by minors. He pointed out that any potential failures in age verification mechanisms indicate flaws in the service provided. While acknowledging that technical certifications exist, he clarified that they do not guarantee the reliability of the systems used by Pixbet.
The ruling also referenced the precautionary principle, emphasizing that the potential risk to children necessitates protective action without needing proof of actual harm. Fabrício addressed the argument that the Campina Grande Court should not have jurisdiction over a nationwide ruling, asserting instead that it was indeed within its rights due to the national nature of the alleged harm and the company’s operations, as referenced in Article 93, II, of the Consumer Protection Code (CDC).
Ultimately, the magistrate accepted the interlocutory appeal for review but denied the request to stay the execution of the suspension. The ban will remain enforced until Pixbet successfully demonstrates concrete measures to control access by minors.
The ruling concluded that there is little chance of the appeal succeeding, warning that lifting the suspension would pose a significant and irreparable threat to children and youth. As a result, the judge maintained that the conditions for a stay of execution, as set out in Articles 995 (sole paragraph) and 1,019, I, of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), had not been adequately met, leading to the denial of the request.
