3 weeks ago
That's exactly how it is. The sentences should be enforced with full force. What do they actually think? I could never believe that and that would be a complete rip-off.
Automatic translation:
Execution Pokerstars. Apparently, payment is not voluntary (page 106)
3 weeks ago
In the end, I see it as a positive thing.
Pokerstars will pay and now wants to try to save as much as possible. I also found the email very confusing, why enforcement should fail if bill55 is overturned is not clear to me. It will be fine, glglglgl
Automatic translation:
3 weeks ago
Well, there are certainly people who will accept this deal.
A friend of mine has been wanting to declare private bankruptcy for some time, but doesn't want the money from the lawsuit to go into the bankruptcy estate. But since it could be another 1-2 years, the deal doesn't seem like a good idea for him.
Obviously, they hope that some will accept the deal.
Many gambling addicts would also accept the deal, but most have probably already sold their claims.
I just hope that it will all be over this year. The German state should have intervened long ago, that's really cheeky.
Automatic translation:
3 weeks ago
Ultimately, I see it as a positive sign. Pokerstars knows that they have to pay and they want to save as much as they can. The 25% was offered without interest, by the way. I declined and am now putting it aside until something happens. It'll be fine, glglglglgl
Automatic translation:
3 weeks ago
Well, I think this will all take until the end of 2026, which I hope won't happen. I'm curious about the ruling from the ECJ that the BGH has initiated.
Automatic translation:
3 weeks ago
Do they offer to cover the legal costs? Then that probably explains why the lawyer is pushing for the settlement to be accepted. He will get exactly the same amount as if he were involved in the legal dispute for years to come. But if he accepts, he will no longer have any work to do and the case will be over.
Automatic translation:
3 weeks ago
I don't know. I mean, Pokerstars has to pay the costs anyway, right? However, the law firm gets 32% of the value in dispute, which is a big difference between 25 and 100%.
Automatic translation:
3 weeks ago
The law firm is not the litigation financer, at least I am not aware of any law firm that is both.
Automatic translation:
3 weeks ago
That may be so. Then it would make sense.
Automatic translation:
3 weeks ago
To all Austrians!
Last week I had the opportunity to plead as plaintiff’s counsel in Case C-77/24 in the Grand Chamber of the ECJ.
A very impressive and exciting experience!
The content was about the question of whether managers of illegal online casinos can be sued in Austria, and Bill 55 and various other machinations of #onlinecasinos were also topics. The court seemed very interested, it remains exciting!
A verdict in the case is expected in 6-8 months from the plaintiff's lawyer.
That's what it says on LinkedIn.
greeting
Edited by
Romi 3 weeks ago
Reason:
Link removed.
Automatic translation:
3 weeks ago
do you have a link to linkedin?
Automatic translation:
3 weeks ago
Good morning !
moment
Automatic translation:
3 weeks ago
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/hashtag/gambling?trk=feed-detail_main-feed-card-text
3 weeks ago
Sorry, was the wrong link
Automatic translation:
3 weeks ago
The best thing to do is search for Oliver Peschel on LinkedIn, he was the plaintiff's lawyer.
Automatic translation:
3 weeks ago
Here is the article
Automatic translation:
3 weeks ago
Here is the article. Unfortunately I can't create a link.
Automatic translation:
3 weeks ago
Here is the article
Unfortunately, I cannot create a link
Automatic translation:
3 weeks ago
thank you! sounds interesting. maybe we'll finally get some clarity this year. that would be good for everyone involved.
Automatic translation:
3 weeks ago
I only found it by chance because I still follow my former lawyer on LinkedIn.
Automatic translation:
