Aktuelles zum niederländischen Glücksspielrecht

Aktuelles zum niederländischen Glücksspielrechts

Von unserem Kooperationspartner Justin Franssen, Rechtsanwalt bei Van Mens & Wisselink,
Amsterdam

Wie bereits in unseren Betting-Law-News 09/05 steht uns als Gastkommentator erneut
Rechtsanwalt Justin Franssen, Van Mens & Wisselink/Amsterdam für einen Kurzbericht über
aktuelle Entwicklungen in den Niederlanden zur Verfügung.

Er berichtet zunächst von dem Versuch des einzigen staatlichen Kasinoanbieters „Holland
Casino“, trotz restriktiver staatlicher Glücksspielpolitik, die Errichtung weitere land-
based Kasinos in Amsterdam und Rotterdam einzuklagen.

Im sog. "Breda"- Fall – von dem Franssen bereits berichtete (Betting-Law-News 09/05) -
hat nun die niederländische Regierung unterstützt durch den staatlichen Anbieter „Holland
Casino“ Berufung gegen das Urteil eingelegt, in dem das niederländische Gericht die
Europarechtswidrigkeit des niederländischen Glücksspiel-Monopols klargestellt hatte.
Zuletzt thematisiert Franssen die Eckpunkte des Streits über die gesetzliche Legitimation
des Online-Casino-Monopols für Holland Casino. Nach heftiger Kritik an der exklusive
Online-Lizenzierung des Monopolisten, werden derzeit Ergänzungen zum dem Gesetzesentwurf
diskutiert, die vorsehen, dass auch andere private Anbieter für eine Online-Lizenz in
Betracht kommen.

Im Einzelnen:

Recent developments in The Netherlands:

Litigation between Holland Casino and Ministry of Justice

State casino operator Holland Casino - in a joint effort with the city of Amsterdam and
Rotterdam - sued the national government for not allowing a second Holland Casino
facility to be located in the cities Amsterdam and Rotterdam. On 16 June 2006 the
Administrative Court of Rotterdam rendered a negative ruling for Holland Casino and the
cities of Rotterdam and Amsterdam. The parties now have the option to appeal this matter
before the "Afdeling Rechtspraak Raad van State", (Council of State) which is the highest
instance court in Administrative law matters. At this stage it is unknown if any of the
parties have appealed yet. Some observers called the litigation of Holland Casino against
the government as remarkable:

Holland Casino obtained its monopoly purely to execute the restrictive Dutch casino
gaming policy set out by the Dutch government and the government justifies the casino-
monopoly because it is supposed to be the best instrument to have a tight grip on the
industry. With this step Holland Casino seems to aim to undermine the restrictive gaming
policy of the government who does not allow more casinos in one city.
Pending Appeal case Compagnie Financiere Regionale vs Ministry of Justice (aka Breda
Court Case)

In the first instance main proceedings decision the Breda Admnistrative Court ruled in
December last year that the casino license application from a French private operator
(despite the legal monopoly of Holland Casino) could not be dismissed because the Dutch
gaming policies do not comply with European law, notably with the criteria set out by the
European Court of Justice in the controversial Gambelli case. Holland Casino decided to
join the government in the appeal case against CFR and very recently it rendered its
written submission to the Council of State Court to be continued. Like in many other
European jurisdictions such as Germany and Italy, The Netherlands joins the ranks of
countries were conflicting post-Gambelli decisions are rendered.
Temporary exclusive on-line gaming license for Holland Casino

A suggested (new) on-line gaming monopoly for Holland Casino received critique from The
Council of State, The European Commission and from the private industry. The law will
probably be debated in Parliament on 5,6 or 7 September. There are indications that
amendments will be tabled to the effect to allow more licensees than just Holland Casino.
Should this amendment make it to the Chamber than the law needs to be redrafted entirely.
We feel the Minister of Justice Mr Donner takes a considerable risk by granting an new
monopoly to Holland Casino. In other Member States of the Union this has lead to fierce
litigation and action of the European Commission:

In a French case initiated by Casino Groupe Partouche it fights the on-line gaming
monopoly granted to Francaise de Jeux. In Sweden litigtion is pending regarding the on-
line poker monopoly that was granted to Svenska Spel excluding other interested parties
from the licensing process. It is to be expected that Holland will be next in line should
the government continue to execute its plans to extend the Holland Casino monopoly on-
line.

Quelle: Hambach & Hambach Rechtsanwälte

Het staatsbedrijf Holland Casino heeft eind mei een rechtszaak gevoerd tegen de staat, omdat het bedrijf van minister Donner (Justitie) geen tweede vestiging mag openen in Rotterdam en Amsterdam. Holland Casino werd in de rechtszaak gesteund door de gemeenten Rotterdam en Amsterdam, die graag een tweede casino in hun stad willen.

Volgens minister Donner staat de wet niet toe dat een stad meer dan één casino heeft. Maar de bestuursrechter in Rotterdam oordeelde eind juni in de zaak die door Holland Casino was aangespannen dat dit niet in de wet staat. Wel heeft de minister van Justitie een „discretionaire bevoegdheid”, waardoor hij een tweede vestiging van het staatscasino in een stad kan weigeren.

Het Holland Casino zelf wil graag uitbreiden en ook theaters en bioscopen gaan exploiteren. Ook wil het staatsbedrijf in de toekomst in het buitenland casino’s exploiteren. Dat zegt directeur Henk Kivits vandaag in deze krant. Uiteindelijk beslist de minister van Justitie over uitbreiding van de staatscasino’s. Huidig minister Donner is echter geen voorstander van uitbreiding.