THE HAGUE - A new legal development in the Netherlands could have significant implications for Curaçao’s gambling sector and its ongoing discussions about consumer protection and illegal operators. The Advocate General (AG) to the Dutch Supreme Court has issued a detailed advisory opinion concluding that online gambling contracts entered into before 1 October 2021 are not invalid (nietig) — even if the gambling company operated without a Dutch license at the time.
The opinion, which is influential but not binding, was published as part of a series of prejudicial questions submitted to the Supreme Court in major lawsuits brought by Dutch gamblers seeking to reclaim their losses from international gambling companies.
AG: Online gambling contracts were never invalid
According to the AG, the Dutch Wet op de Kansspelen (Wok) never aimed to nullify gambling contracts themselves. The law only prohibited offering games of chance without a license — not the agreements between players and operators.
“The Wok has never had the intention of invalidating gambling agreements concluded without a license.”
— Advocate General S.D. Lindenbergh
This means that, in the AG’s view:
gambling agreements before 1 October 2021 remain legally valid;
gamblers cannot automatically reclaim losses due to “unjust payment”;
it makes no difference whether the operator met the Dutch gaming authority’s prioritization criteria;
and contracts remain valid even when the operator facilitates player-to-player games (such as poker).
The Supreme Court will decide later whether to adopt the AG’s reasoning. A ruling date has not yet been announced.
Why this matters for Curaçao
Curaçao-based operators were among the major players offering online gambling in the Netherlands before regulation took effect in 2021. If the Supreme Court follows the AG’s advice:
thousands of Dutch claimants may lose their legal basis to recover gambling losses, reducing the risk exposure for operators historically licensed in Curaçao;
mass claims (massaclaims) being prepared by lawyers and consumer groups could collapse;
scrutiny may shift from contract validity to duty of care and consumer protection — areas where Curaçao’s new licensing system is currently being redesigned.
For Curaçao, which is working to overhaul its entire gambling regulatory framework, the decision may influence how new consumer protection standards are shaped and how responsibility is assigned between operators and players.
Sharp criticism from claimant lawyers
Not everyone agrees with the AG's interpretation. Lawyer Benzi Loonstein, who represents many Dutch gamblers, calls the opinion “remarkable and worrying.”
“This goes against the prevailing view. Courts have already said many times that these contracts are invalid… If the AG’s reasoning is followed, illegal casinos can keep operating and players cannot reclaim losses. That would be bizarre.”
— Benzi Loonstein, Loonstein Advocaten
Another claimant representative, Deepak Thakoerdien of Dynamiet Nederland, warned that the advisory — if adopted — would leave consumers unprotected:
“An illegal operator could let players lose unlimited amounts without any right to recover losses. Fortunately, it is only an advisory. The Supreme Court must still decide.”
Both note that the issue remains “socially urgent,” given widespread gambling losses in the years before regulation.
Background: Mass claims and conflicting rulings
Since 2024, Dutch courts have been confronted with a wave of lawsuits from gamblers trying to recover their losses from companies such as PokerStars, Bwin, Unibet, and PartyCasino.
Some courts ruled in favor of the gamblers, declaring the gambling contracts void and ordering operators to repay hundreds of thousands of euros. Other courts disagreed, creating conflicting jurisprudence — prompting the request for clarification from the Supreme Court.
Next steps
The AG's advisory has now been shared with the Supreme Court. When the Court issues its final ruling, it will determine:
whether thousands of Dutch gamblers can continue pursuing claims;
how far operators must go in protecting players;
and potentially, how Curaçao-based operators’ historic activities are interpreted under Dutch law.
For Curaçao, where discussions continue about tightening oversight and improving the island’s international reputation, the Dutch ruling may help shape future compliance expectations — especially in cross-border gambling disputes.