Swedish Court Overturns SEK8 Million Fine Against LeoVegas

Swedish Court Overturns SEK8 Million Fine Against LeoVegas – Administrative Ruling Reshapes Responsible Gambling Enforcement

Key Takeaways

• The Administrative Court in Linkoping has overturned a SEK8 million fine imposed on LeoVegas, operating as Roar Vegas in Sweden.
• The Swedish Gambling Authority had sanctioned the operator for alleged breaches of duty of care provisions under the Gambling Act.
• The court found that the evidence presented did not clearly demonstrate a serious violation warranting a financial penalty.
• The ruling emphasizes that the duty of care does not prescribe exact timelines for interventions in cases of suspected excessive gambling.

Administrative Court Reverses Swedish Gambling Authority Decision

The Administrative Court in Linkoping has annulled a March 2025 decision by the Swedish Gambling Authority, Spelinspektionen, to fine LeoVegas SEK8 million, equivalent to approximately $852,867. The Malta based operator offers its services in Sweden under the brand name Roar Vegas.

The original sanction followed a supervisory review conducted by the regulator covering the period from 1 January to 31 March 2024. Spelinspektionen concluded that Roar Vegas had failed to meet its statutory duty of care obligations under Sweden’s Gambling Act in relation to certain high risk customers.

In its judgment dated 12 June, the court fully reversed the fine and formal reprimand. After examining the evidence and legal arguments presented, the court determined that the regulator had not demonstrated sufficiently clear and unambiguous grounds for imposing the penalty.

Regulator Focused on High Loss Accounts and Deposit Limits

Spelinspektionen based its findings on a sample of 12 customer accounts. These accounts were selected from two age groups, 18 to 24 years and 25 years and older, and represented the highest loss players during the review period.

The authority highlighted three accounts in particular. These customers had set unusually high monthly deposit limits, ranging between SEK100,000 and SEK300,000. The regulator also identified behavioral indicators such as rapid deposits followed by losses and extended session durations. According to Spelinspektionen, these factors signaled excessive gambling activity.

Although the authority acknowledged that Roar Vegas eventually implemented measures that reduced gambling activity for the affected customers, it concluded that the interventions were introduced too late and were insufficient. On that basis, the regulator issued both a formal reprimand and the administrative fine of SEK8 million.

LeoVegas Argued Monitoring Systems and Interventions Were in Place

Roar Vegas challenged the decision, arguing that it had comprehensive systems to detect and address problematic gambling behavior. According to the operator, its responsible gambling framework combines automated alerts with manual follow ups. The company stated that it had imposed deposit limits and, where necessary, suspended accounts.

The operator also emphasized that it applied a cautious and voluntary approach when engaging with customers before escalating to stricter restrictions. It disputed the regulator’s interpretation of certain behavioral indicators. In particular, it argued that long log in durations and rapid losses after deposits can be typical for sports bettors and should not automatically be equated with problem gambling.

Roar Vegas further pointed to legal uncertainty prior to legislative amendments that took effect on 1 June 2024. According to the company, there had been ambiguity around the processing of personal health and financial data used in responsible gambling assessments.

In support of its broader position, the operator referenced a survey covering the last quarter century which found that the proportion of Swedish adults classified as problem gamblers decreased from 2.2 percent in 2008 to 2009 to 1.3 percent in 2021. This represented a reduction of approximately 57,000 individuals, or a 35 percent decline over that period.

Court Found Interventions Reduced Risk and Met Legal Threshold

In case number 3061-25, the Administrative Court examined whether Roar Vegas had breached its duty of care to a degree that justified regulatory sanctions.

The court acknowledged that the sampled accounts reflected high risk profiles. However, it noted that only three customers exhibited both rapid significant losses and high deposit limits. It also found that Roar Vegas had deployed automatic notifications, mandatory deposit limits, account suspensions, and manual follow up measures.

According to the court, these actions led to a reduction in gambling activity among the affected customers. While the judgment recognized that some interventions could have been implemented sooner, it concluded that the delays were not sufficiently serious to meet the statutory threshold for imposing a financial penalty.

The court also agreed that the duty of care provisions in the Gambling Act do not specify exact timelines for intervention. Given the continuous nature of online gambling, the assessment must be based on a standard of reasonableness. In this case, the court found that Roar Vegas had acted within such a reasonable timeframe.

Detailed records submitted by the operator, including action plans and system enhancements, were considered by the court to undermine the regulator’s assertion of a clear and serious breach.

Our Assessment

The ruling removes an SEK8 million financial sanction and formal reprimand previously imposed on LeoVegas in Sweden. The court’s decision clarifies how duty of care obligations under the Swedish Gambling Act are interpreted in practice, particularly regarding the timing and proportionality of interventions in high risk cases. For operators and users in the Swedish market, the judgment highlights the importance of documented monitoring systems and measurable intervention outcomes when responsible gambling practices are reviewed by regulators.