Swedish Gambling Authority loses appeal over Kindred fine

Sweden’s Administrative Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal by the Swedish Gambling Authority (SGA) against a prior court ruling concerning the interpretation of deposit limits by Kindred Group.

The SGA launched the appeal questioning the implications for the Swedish licensed market and the continuing implementation of temporary online casino limits on Swedish players, first introduced in June 2020.

It suggested the legal interpretation diminished the effectiveness of the limits in protecting consumers from gambling-related harm.

“The Administrative Court’s interpretation also means that the licensee who offers both commercial online gaming and betting can easily circumvent the deposit limits, while a licensee who only offers commercial online gaming cannot do so,” the SGA stated in its appeal.

Kindred Group’s Swedish operating entity Spooniker was sanctioned by the SGA in December for allegedly breaching the SEK5,000 (£440) per week deposit limit for online casino.

SGA investigators found that consumers were able to deposit funds into their adjacent sportsbook accounts before transferring the cash to their online gaming accounts.

This created a loophole which allowed players to spend up to SEK50,000 of new deposits per week on online casino games.

Kindred was given three weeks to fix the issue, with a separate SEK1m fine per week for each week the loophole remained live.

At the time, the Stockholm-listed operator asserted that it had interpreted the temporary regulations “as they are written” and had allowed customers to proceed on this basis.

“That means that it is the deposit limit set by the customer that determines his/her access to the products,” Kindred stated.

“However, the SGA has adopted a different interpretation that it is the actual deposits made that determines product access, which is not what is intended by the regulations,” the operator added.

Kindred launched a legal appeal against the SGA’s decision, which it won in April, when judges at the Administrative Court annulled the initial SGA injunction on grounds its interpretation of the regulations were incorrect.

“The court finds that the provision cannot be interpreted in any other way than that it is the deposit limit specified by the player that determines whether he can be offered commercial online gambling, not his actual deposits,” judges at the administrative court stated.

The SGA loss now means this interpretation can be used in any subsequent cases where deposit limits are questioned.