In 2004, the Swedish Supreme Court upheld the nation’s gambling monopoly—dominated by state-owned Svenska Spel—as consistent with the European Community (EC) Treaty. The justification was public interest: preventing gambling addiction, fraud, and crime.
But just a few years later, the legal certainty started to unravel. The Supreme Court referred the matter back to the Court of Appeals, requesting a new review of the Swedish Lottery Act in light of evolving EU law. The Court of Appeals submitted five detailed questions to the European Court of Justice (ECJ), all focusing on whether Sweden’s restrictions on foreign gambling operators violated the EU’s single market principles.
Key Questions Submitted to the ECJ
The five ECJ questions challenged Sweden’s monopoly on several fronts, including:
- Whether national restrictions based on public interest justify discrimination by nationality in gambling markets
- If funding social activities can be the main justification for limiting foreign competition
- Whether state-owned operators advertising gambling undermines the argument for public health restrictions
- If banning foreign-licensed gambling ads is proportionate while allowing domestic promotion
- Whether a foreign-licensed gambling operator has the right to advertise across EU borders without additional permissions
The legal community anticipated the ECJ’s response would take 18–24 months, but the impact was immediate: the spotlight returned to Sweden’s restrictive framework and its potential conflict with EU law.
Sweden’s Regulatory Pivot: 2019 Gambling Act
As pressure mounted, Sweden launched a full regulatory overhaul. On January 1, 2019, the Swedish Gambling Act (Spellagen 2018:1138) came into effect, transitioning the market from a monopoly to a license-based model.
The new system requires all operators targeting Swedish consumers—online or land-based—to hold a valid license issued by Spelinspektionen, the national gambling regulator. Core requirements include:
- Only one welcome bonus per user across all brands
- Mandatory ID verification (BankID)
- Deposit and session limits
- Direct connection to Spelpaus.se, Sweden’s national self-exclusion system
While this modernized the legal structure, it also sparked criticism. Many players turned to offshore alternatives due to the system’s restrictive bonus and marketing policies.
Example: Thousands of Swedish players each year now seek casinos without a Swedish license (casino utan svensk licens) for unrestricted gameplay, fast withdrawals, and higher bonuses.
EU-Wide Implications Still Unfolding
The Swedish case set a precedent. Other EU countries with state monopolies—such as Germany, Portugal, and France—continue to monitor the ECJ’s response and Sweden’s ongoing regulatory balancing act.
Private EU-based gambling firms are also lobbying for equal treatment across borders, claiming that Sweden’s strict bonus caps, ad restrictions, and payment blocking violate market freedoms.
Legal analysts suggest that if a new challenge emerges—particularly related to marketing bans or payment blocks—the European Commission may be forced to issue updated guidance on how far Member States can go in limiting gambling access under the guise of public interest.
Sweden Today: Licensed but Contested
Although Sweden now operates under a license regime, the market remains tightly controlled. Offshore competition continues to grow, and enforcement challenges persist.
With legal uncertainty still in play, Sweden stands at the center of a larger debate: Can EU countries maintain restrictive national gambling policies in an era of cross-border digital commerce?