On August 7, 2024, the Rio de Janeiro State Lottery (Loterj) proposed anticipatory relief requested in advance against the National Telecommunications Agency (Anatel) to order internet providers to block access to hundreds of indicated bookmakers by the municipality in action.
Loterj cannot legislate on betting according to decision
The bookmakers that were targeted by the blockade were those that did not apply for a state license, in accordance with the terms of decree no. 48.806/2023 of the State of Rio de Janeiro.
Loterj saw its injunction rejected in the first instance, which was partially reformed. The decision provides for the effects of the protection of the appeal in an interlocutory appeal.
The decision “authorizes Anatel to promote the verification of the operational legitimacy of listed companies”. This must occur before the lottery and, in return, Anatel will take the appropriate measures to suspend the activities of lotteries that are not in accordance with the applicable legislation.
Some bookmakers requested clarification and filed an internal appeal against this decision. This included the Attorney General’s Office (AGU). On August 12, the rapporteur suspended the measure requested by the Rio de Janeiro Lottery. The reason was that bets must regulate operations before December 31, 2024.
On the 20th, immediately after the decision, Loterj presented a statement of withdrawal from the main action filed against Anatel. Two days later, the court of the 13th Federal Civil Court of the SJDF ruled on the request. The court considered Loterj’s action unfounded due to the lack of right to appeal.
Appeal is still possible
In fact, the president of Loterj signed the original petition. Although he is a lawyer registered with the Brazilian Bar Association (OAB), he cannot practice law as a member of the authority. Therefore, the decision ruled out any possibility of considering the withdrawal request.
So, given this decision, it is still possible for Loterj to appeal. Furthermore, the aforementioned interlocutory appeal is pending judgment. However, the main appeal was accepted, making the interlocutory appeal irrelevant.
Therefore, based on this scenario, the issue of competence to legislate on the regulation and licensing of bookmakers will not be considered by the TRF (Federal Regional Court of the 1st Region). However, to do so, it is necessary to wait for the judgment of individual requests proposed by certain betting companies.
