Dutch Court Upholds KSA’s Decision to Reject Gambling Licence Application
The Hague District Court has ruled in favor of the Dutch gambling regulator, Kansspelautoriteit (KSA), in a case concerning a rejected gambling licence application. The decision, made on 20 February but disclosed on 26 February, confirms that the regulator was justified in refusing the application due to concerns about the integrity of a former shareholder.
KSA’s Concerns Over Former Shareholder
In February 2023, KSA declined a licence application from an unnamed gambling provider seeking entry into the Dutch regulated market.
The regulator cited concerns about a former shareholder, who was suspected of involvement in the murder of an investigative journalist linked to a corruption case in Malta.
Although the individual had cut ties with the provider in November 2021, KSA requested additional details as part of its standard integrity review.
However, the regulator stated that the information submitted was “incorrect and evasive or incomplete,” prompting it to reject the application.
Appeal Against the Licence Rejection
Disagreeing with KSA’s reasoning, the provider took the matter to the Netherlands’ court of appeal. It argued that once it became aware of the allegations against the shareholder, it took immediate steps to remove them from the company.
Additionally, the provider cited clearance from the National Bibob Agency, which assesses business partners’ integrity, as evidence of its compliance.
The provider also pointed to its role in supporting the development of Dutch online gambling regulations, including its contribution to the Cruks self-exclusion scheme and its sponsorship of the Betblocker gambling blocking tool.
Court Sides with KSA
After reviewing the case, the Hague District Court ruled in favor of KSA, stating that the provider’s failure to submit accurate and complete information justified the regulator’s decision.
“Carrying out integrity tests is an important part of the supervision by the KSA,” the regulator stated.
“Ensuring the integrity of providers has a high priority and it is the responsibility of the provider to demonstrate this reliability with the correct information.
“If an investigation by KSA shows that the reliability of a director is not beyond doubt, or if providers do not provide the correct information, KSA can take enforcement action or refuse a requested permit.”
KSA welcomed the ruling, reaffirming its commitment to strict regulatory oversight.
Despite the court’s decision, the provider retains the right to challenge the ruling through another appeal.