NETHERLANDS Trends and Developments Contributed by: Alan Littler, Franssen Tolboom
The NGA has proven to be a very active regulator, and one which does not hesitate to take action. Such action may take the shape of a formal sanction (such as a fine), in which case the operator will have the opportunity to provide its views to the NGA on the proposed sanction ahead of it being served. Further- more it will be able to object to it once adopted, once again before the NGA, with appeals to the courts remaining an option thereafter. Other measures in the NGA’s toolbox are somewhat lighter in nature, and do not provide the subject with the opportunity to pro- vide formal views before the measure is served, and no route to object to it subsequently exists. This is also marked by the lack of a decision which can be appealed before the courts. Yet it has become clear that the NGA will also take such matters into consid- eration when weighing up the applicant’s suitability to hold another licence. Two points are of particular interest at this juncture. First, the NGA will require that a licensed applicant (an applicant that already holds a licence at the time of submitting an application for a subsequent licence) must submit a document detailing the lessons acquired from each and every breach of the regulatory regime as established by the NGA. This document will have to show the licensed applicant’s ability to learn from its errors, during the first five years it was on the market. Secondly, not only will the NGA form a view based on sanction decisions and other measures, including decisions which are still in the pipeline at the time the application is considered, it will also consider the licensed applicant’s “attitude” during the first five years. Evidently, this has every danger of being a sub- jective assessment of an applicant’s behaviour, rather than one based upon firm(er) findings as to whether, and to what extent, particular breaches of the regula- tory regime arose. This is certainly a point to watch, and in particular regarding how the NGA’s reasoning will take shape should it seek to rely on “attitude” in a way that could have a material impact on the outcome of an application. The Policy Rule 2026 also demonstrates that the NGA has reflected more broadly on its experience of the licensed remote gambling market to date. An ongoing obligation, which rests on the shoulders of the entity holding the remote gambling licence, is to report all rel-
evant changes within the entire group structure within 14 days of their occurrence. This includes wrongdo- ings falling within the scope of reliability assessment. Whilst this would probably be a relatively simple task if it were restricted to the licensed entity, its direc- tors, policymakers and shareholders, the scope of the task can encompass hundreds of (natural and legal) persons spread across the globe. The NGA will now require an applicant to provide a policy detailing how it will go about ensuring that it will meet this notifica- tion obligation, which also includes notifying the NGA about incidents within 72 hours of becoming aware of them. This may well be due to the NGA having come to the realisation that some matters are not notified at all, or are notified only after the relevant term has expired. It is expected that the NGA will want to see how it is ensured that relevant information is funnelled to the competent individual within a licence holder’s organisation in a timely and sufficient fashion. Another key development is the requirement for an applicant to provide an “exit plan”. This plan must detail how the operator will wind down its operations in the event of the termination of its licence or due to the cessation of its gambling offer, but without the licence being withdrawn. The former is particularly interesting, given that the vast majority of regulatory requirements are squarely addressed to the “licence holder”, and not a former licence holder. One of the NGA’s key considerations in this regard is the efforts that will be made to return player credits, and in par- ticular those instances where this does not prove pos- sible ahead of the operator’s licensed status coming to an end. With such requirements being put into action in 2026, it will most certainly be interesting to see how the NGA navigates the course it has set for itself and how it handles the first applications from those seeking to remain on the Dutch market for another five years. Advertising In addition to the above, 2025 saw a spark which may prove to ignite further action in the future. One of the central tenets of the Dutch regulatory regime is the prohibition on offering unlicensed games of chance (where it is the absence of a licence awarded by the NGA that counts). This prohibition is supported by
362 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook