EU Court Upholds Valencia’s Betting-Hall Restrictions

A landmark decision from the EU’s top court just shook land-based gaming regulation.

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has upheld the validity of the Valencian Community’s strict rules on gambling halls—distance buffers, licence moratoriums, machine restrictions—all held compatible with Article 49 TFEU.

As a gambling-industry regulation analyst, I believe this judgment signals a pivotal shift. Operators and policymakers alike need to understand what this ruling means for expansion, compliance and market strategy.

Keep reading—my personal analytical take will break down the ruling, explore implications and highlight what you should do next.

Key Points

• The CJEU ruled on 16 October 2025 in joined cases C-718/23 to C-721/23 and C-60/24.
• The Valencian regime included: an 850-metre buffer between gaming halls and schools; a 500-metre minimum distance between gaming venues; a five-year moratorium on new licences; and restrictions on certain slot machines in hospitality locales.
• The Court held these measures restrict freedom of establishment (Art 49 TFEU) but are justified by overriding reasons of public interest – namely consumer protection and gambling-harm prevention.
• The decision emphasises that Member States have wide discretion when regulating gambling due to moral/social implications.
• National courts must still examine proportionality – i.e., whether each restriction is appropriate, necessary and not excessive.

EU Court Green-lights Spain’s Gaming-Hall Crackdown: What Operators Should Know

From my vantage in the gambling-regulation world, the CJEU’s ruling in favour of the Valencian restrictions is significant on several levels. It affirms that regional or national regimes can impose tough rules on land-based gaming venues—even when those rules restrict what traditionally would be market access for operators.

The Nature of the Restrictions

Operators in the Valencian Community challenged the regime introduced by Law 1/2020 and Decree 97/2021. The contested measures included:

• A minimum distance of 850 metres from schools or educational establishments to gaming halls.
• A minimum distance of 500 metres between gaming halls and other specified gaming venues.
• A moratorium of up to five years on the granting of new licences or authorisations.
• The obligation for existing venues (including slot machines in hospitality venues) to comply with new zones or face non-renewal.

Operators claimed these rules violated freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). They argued that other existing safeguards (e.g., advertising bans, age-gates) made distance or moratorium rules redundant.

What the Court Decided

The CJEU acknowledged that the rules effectively limit the freedom of establishment (Art 49 TFEU) because they impede operators entering or expanding in the market.

However, the Court held that the restrictions can be legitimate. They respond to “overriding reasons in the general interest” (public health, prevention of addiction) and are compatible with EU law provided they are proportionate.

Importantly, the Court emphasised Member States’ broad discretion on gambling regulation, citing the moral and social dimensions of games of chance. Thus, where compelling evidence of harm or proliferation exists, stricter controls may survive EU scrutiny.

Why It Matters to Operators

In my analysis, this ruling sends a clear message to operators across Europe: the mere invocation of free movement or establishment rights will not guarantee market access if public‐interest regulation is robust. Key takeaways include:

• Distance and moratorium measures are lawful tools if evidence underpins them and they are applied consistently.
• Regulators are empowered to apply fixed-term moratoria or renewal regimes instead of unlimited permits.
• Operators must be ready for territorial rights regimes, meaning they should undertake rigorous due-diligence of local regulation, buffer zones and renewal policies.
• Advertising bans, age-controls and minimum distance rules often work together, but one cannot automatically replace the other. The Court reaffirmed that different risks (exposure, normalization, saturation) require tailored responses.
• For expansion strategies, operators must recognise that even within a supposedly free market like the EU, local jurisdictions retain strong regulatory autonomy.

From My Perspective

I believe the Valencian case will become a benchmark in the industry. It highlights the balance regulators are striking: opening markets while guarding vulnerable consumers and managing venue saturation. Operators planning entry or expansion must recalibrate their strategies accordingly.

It also reveals that local/regional laws matter. Even if an operator holds a national licence, sub-national authorities may impose further restrictions. Therefore, market access strategies must consider multiple layers of regulation.

For established operators, this ruling justifies investing in regulatory intelligence, legal contingency planning and exit or relocation strategies should local regimes evolve unfavourably.

For emerging operators, the lesson is clear: do not assume free movement rights override regulatory safeguards. Instead, prepare detailed regulatory compliance dossiers, stakeholder engagement plans and adapt to territorial regulation approaches.

The Court of Justice of the European Union has upheld the Valencian Community’s restrictions on gaming halls—distance buffers, licence moratoria and machine-operation constraints—under Article 49 TFEU.
This ruling affirms that public-health and addiction-prevention objectives can justify limits on freedom of establishment in the gambling sector—if they meet the proportionality test.
From my expert view, the decision underscores that operators must adapt to evolving regulatory landscapes at both national and regional levels. The era of assuming unfettered market access across jurisdictions may be coming to an end.

Tags: CJEU-Gambling, ValenciaGamingLaw, GamingHallRegulation, EUfreedomOfEstablishment, SlotMachineRestrictions

📢 Join the Conversation!

Want to share your thoughts or ask questions about our latest articles? Stay connected and be part of the discussion by joining our Telegram and WhatsApp channels!

🔹 Get real-time updates
🔹 Share insights with industry peers
🔹 Ask questions & get expert answers

👉 Join us on Telegram 👉 Join us on WhatsApp

Let’s keep the conversation going!