The player had been a customer of the betting house since 2020 and had his account limited and, later, on December 28, 2024, closed by bet365 after being successful in his bets, even though he always respected the terms of use.
Before his account was closed, the bettor had made a profit of around R$10,000 (US$1,755) between the months of October and December of last year, after moments of losses, duly presented in the records.
Judge Ana Cristina Viegas Lopes de Oliveira asked in her decision: “Why didn’t the defendant [bet365] limit the plaintiff in other situations? For example, in cases of consecutive losses in bets or even in a period of more significant losses.”
The Court recognized that the contractual clause that allowed termination without just cause was abusive and violated basic principles such as good faith and the right to consumer protection. In the decision, the judge stated: “the clause that allowed termination ‘at the sole discretion of the company’ without reasonable justification violates the principles of good faith, contractual balance and the right to information, all guaranteed by the Consumer Protection Code (CDC).”
“In view of the above, I DECLARE the requests contained in the initial claim PROCEEDING: to declare the nullity of item 17.1 of the defendant’s Terms and Conditions; to order the defendant to undertake the obligation to reactivate the plaintiff’s account on its platform, without limitations on the functionalities or unilateral obstacles and unrelated to actual non-compliance with the Terms and Conditions, within five days, under penalty of a daily fine of R$200.00 (two hundred reais) and limited to R$30,000.00 (thirty thousand reais); and to order the defendant to pay the plaintiff the amount of R$3,000.00 (three thousand reais) as moral damages, adjusted by the IPCA index and increased by interest at the Selic rate, if higher than zero and discounted by monetary adjustment, both starting from this arbitration,” determined the judge.
Source: GMB
