Skip to main content
Log in/Register
  • Home
  • Contact Us
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Search form

American Gaming Association

  • Industry Resources
    • Research
    • Video Library
    • Beyond The Casino Floor
    • State Information
    • FAQ
    • The Real Deal
    • Careers in Gaming
    • Third-Party Experts
    • Helpful Links
    • AGA CARD
  • Government Affairs
    • Priority Issues
    • Other Current Issues
    • Regulatory Reform
    • AGA Online Poker Headquarters
    • Industry Day in Washington
    • AGA PAC
    • Request Federal Issues Updates
  • Social Responsibility
    • All In Campaign Headquarters
    • Responsible Gaming
    • Diversity
  • Events and Programs
    • Global Gaming Expo
    • G2E Asia
    • G2E Webinar Series
    • Responsible Gaming Education Week
    • Industry Day in Washington
    • Gaming Hall of Fame
    • Communications Awards
    • Diverse Vendor of the Year Awards
    • Global Gaming Women
  • Newsroom
    • Latest News
    • Press Releases
    • Speeches and Testimony
    • Op-Eds
    • Letters to the Editor
    • AGA SmartBrief
    • Newsletters
  • About the AGA
    • Membership
    • Leadership
    • Annual Report
    • Contact Us

You are here

Home » Newsroom » Newsletters » Gaming Regulatory and Legal Update » Archives

Spouse of Self-Excluded Gambler Recovers Gaming Losses in Germany

Friday, December 1, 2006

The German Supreme Court ruled on December 15 that the spouse of a “gambling addicted” man can recover his losses at gaming machines outside the principal gaming area of a North Rhine Westphalia casino, even though the gambler had signed an agreement waiving any such claim.

The gambler’s agreement with the casino called for a voluntary ban on his play in a supervised area where the “big games” are played. The agreement specified that the casino did not supervise an entrance area that contained gaming machines and cash machines, and that he would have no right to recover losses incurred if he gambled in that unsupervised area. The court found that the gambler’s waiver was not effective because a casino employee had to assist him with withdrawals he made from the cash machines at the entrance area. Because of the employee’s involvement, the court concluded, the casino had the opportunity to review whether the gambler was barred from play, and should have done so.

In the case before the court, the gambler had lost 10,000 Deutschmarks withdrawn in 20 separate transactions from the cash machines in the entrance area. The spouse was allowed to recover that amount. Opinion of December 15, 2005,  III ZR 65-05.

‹ Canadian Responsible Gambling Programs Continue to Proliferate up Casinos and Supreme Court Justices ›

In This Section

  • Latest News
  • Press Releases
  • Speeches and Testimony
  • Op-Eds
  • Letters to the Editor
  • AGA SmartBrief
  • Newsletters
    • Responsible Gaming Quarterly
    • Gaming Regulatory and Legal Update
      • Archives
    • Regulatory Reform Update

Affiliated Websites

Visit the NCRG Webiste

Visit the NCRG Website

Visit the G2E Website

The G2E Asia Website

Visit the G2E Asia Website

The Global Gaming Women Website

Visit the GGW Website

Find a Career in the Industry

Find a Career in the Industry

© 2013 American Gaming Association.

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Contact Us
  • Home