Brazil Court Suspends Stake Injunction and Restores Betting Ban
Brazil.- 14 October 2026 | www.zonadeazar.com Brazil’s Federal Regional Court of the 3rd Region (TRF3) has suspended the preliminary injunction that allowed Stake to temporarily continue its online betting operations in the country.
The decision, issued by the court’s president, Johonsom Di Salvo, restores the application of Provisional Measure No. 1,394/2026, which requires fixed-odds betting platforms to cease their activities in Brazil.
The ruling overturns the exceptional authorisation granted to Stake on 8 October and represents another development in the legal dispute between the Federal Government and the gambling industry.
TRF3 Suspends Stake’s Authorisation
The suspension was ordered by the president of the Federal Regional Court of the 3rd Region following a request submitted by the Federal Government.
The judge considered that allowing Stake to retain its individual authorisation could cause serious harm to public administrative order.
He also warned that permitting a single platform to remain operational could encourage similar legal challenges from other betting operators seeking individual exemptions.
As a result, Stake loses the judicial protection that allowed it to continue operating while other companies remained subject to nationwide restrictions.
Injunction Granted on 8 October
The original ruling was issued by Federal Judge Cristiane Farias Rodrigues dos Santos of the 9th Federal Civil Court of São Paulo.
The judge partially granted Stake’s request to temporarily preserve the effects of its betting authorisation.
The decision allowed the company to continue operating until 25 October 2026, the date established under the provisional measure for the termination of federal betting authorisations.
The injunction represented a temporary exception to the broader restrictions introduced by the Government.
Stake Sought Authorisation Until 2029
In its original legal application, Stake requested permission to maintain operations until 31 December 2029.
This was the scheduled expiry date of its authorisation granted under SPA/MF Ordinance No. 263/2025.
However, the judge rejected the main request and granted only a more limited alternative.
The initial ruling therefore allowed Stake to remain operational until 25 October without extending its licence protection through to 2029.
Protection for Stake.bet.br
The original injunction prevented authorities from taking certain enforcement actions against Stake’s platform.
These protections included:
- Preventing the automatic termination of Stake’s authorisation.
- Prohibiting the blocking of the stake.bet.br domain.
- Preventing website redirection.
- Restricting sanctions based solely on continued operations during the authorised period.
These protections ceased to apply following the TRF3’s intervention.
Twelve Conditions for Continued Operations
The first-instance ruling also imposed 12 specific conditions that Stake was required to meet during the temporary authorisation period.
Key obligations included:
- Refraining from launching new advertising campaigns.
- Not offering customer bonuses.
- Ensuring customers could withdraw their account balances.
- Maintaining responsible gambling mechanisms.
- Complying with the restrictions established by the judicial decision.
The conditions were designed to allow temporary operations under a restrictive framework.
Federal Government Challenges the Injunction
The Federal Government submitted an application seeking the suspension of the injunction granted in Stake’s favour.
The appeal questioned whether one company should be allowed to continue operating while the rest of the market remained subject to Provisional Measure 1,394/2026.
The Government argued that the exception created regulatory inequality.
It also maintained that the injunction could undermine the consistent implementation of a nationwide public policy.
Concerns Over Commercial Advantages
One of the Government’s central arguments was that the injunction provided Stake with a competitive advantage over other betting platforms.
While competing companies were required to suspend their activities, Stake was permitted to continue offering services during the authorised period.
The Federal Government argued that this discrepancy undermined equal treatment between operators.
The court accepted that the situation could compromise the coherence of the existing regulatory policy.
Risk of Further Legal Challenges
The TRF3 president also considered the possibility that maintaining the injunction could trigger additional legal challenges across the industry.
Other operators might seek comparable judicial decisions allowing them to continue operating.
According to the court’s reasoning, a succession of individual authorisations could weaken the general application of the restrictions.
This concern played an important role in the decision to suspend Stake’s judicial protection.
Stake Opposes the Suspension
Before the court issued its ruling, Stake submitted written arguments opposing the Federal Government’s request.
The company defended the continuation of the injunction that allowed it to remain operational until 25 October.
However, the arguments presented by Stake were not accepted by the president of the TRF3.
The court subsequently suspended the protections originally granted by the first-instance judge.
Consumer Protection Considerations
The ruling also addressed issues relating to the protection of bettors and consumers.
The judge observed that the provisional measure was designed to apply uniformly to market participants.
He also considered that the restrictions were intended to protect consumers in view of the particular characteristics of digital betting services.
This reasoning complemented the court’s concerns regarding public administrative order and regulatory equality.
Stake Once Again Subject to the Betting Ban
Following the new ruling, Stake loses its temporary judicial authorisation and is once again subject to the general provisions of Provisional Measure No. 1,394/2026.
The consequences include the potential redirection of the stake.bet.br domain, as requested by the Ministry of Justice and Public Security.
The suspension restores the restrictions applicable to Stake without granting the company an exemption from the nationwide prohibition.
The Decision Is Not Final
The TRF3 ruling remains provisional within the wider judicial proceedings.
The suspension will remain in effect until a final decision is reached in the mandamus proceedings brought by Stake, or until the court’s presidency issues a new ruling.
Consequently, the decision does not constitute a final determination of every legal issue involved in the dispute.
It also does not definitively resolve the constitutionality of the provisional measure.
Proceedings Continue in São Paulo
The TRF3 president ordered that the ruling be urgently communicated to the 9th Federal Civil Court of São Paulo.
The original legal proceedings initiated by Stake remain ongoing before that court.
Several federal institutions are expected to participate in the process, including:
- Secretariat of Prizes and Betting (SPA/MF).
- National Telecommunications Agency (Anatel).
- Central Bank of Brazil.
- Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office.
The first three institutions must submit reports, after which the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office will issue its opinion.
Possibility of a Further Appeal
The decision issued by the TRF3 presidency can still be challenged.
Stake may file an interlocutory appeal requesting that a panel of judges review the suspension.
This procedure would allow the company to seek reconsideration of the ruling that removed its temporary judicial protection.
A potential appeal represents one of the possible next steps in the ongoing litigation.
Dispute Reaches the Supreme Federal Court
The controversy is also being examined by Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court (STF).
The court is reviewing several legal challenges questioning the constitutionality of Provisional Measure 1,394/2026.
The cases, registered as Direct Actions of Unconstitutionality (ADI) 8024, 8027 and 8028, are under the responsibility of Justice Luiz Fux.
These proceedings seek to determine whether the Government’s betting prohibition complies with constitutional requirements.
Luiz Fux Has Yet to Rule
As of 13 October, Justice Luiz Fux had not issued a ruling on the requests for preliminary injunctions challenging the legislation.
The absence of a decision maintains uncertainty regarding the legal future of the betting ban.
The TRF3 president considered the existence of the Supreme Federal Court proceedings relevant to his assessment.
In his view, individual judicial exemptions should be avoided while the Supreme Court examines the constitutionality of a nationwide policy.
Different Judicial Procedures
The suspension of an injunction and a constitutional review involve distinct judicial procedures.
In Stake’s case, the TRF3 primarily considered the potential harm that an exceptional authorisation could cause to public administrative order.
By contrast, the Supreme Federal Court must examine the constitutional validity of Provisional Measure 1,394/2026.
Therefore, the suspension of Stake’s injunction does not necessarily mean that the Supreme Court will uphold the constitutionality of the betting prohibition.
Impact on Other Operators
The reversal of Stake’s judicial protection represents an important development for other companies affected by the provisional measure.
The ruling indicates that courts may consider individual exemptions detrimental to the implementation of nationwide public policy.
This could influence the legal strategies of operators seeking temporary permission to maintain their activities.
However, each application will still require assessment according to its particular circumstances and legal arguments.
Legal Certainty in the Brazilian Market
The dispute also highlights tensions between authorisations previously granted under Brazil’s regulated system and the new restrictions introduced by the Federal Government.
Stake had obtained an authorisation scheduled to remain valid until December 2029.
The early prohibition of its operations triggered a legal dispute over the effects of that licence and the Government’s authority to modify the regulatory framework.
The outcome may influence how courts interpret operating authorisations granted before the provisional measure entered into force.
Next Steps and Impact
The suspension of Stake’s injunction restores the application of nationwide betting restrictions to the company and marks another significant development in Brazil’s legal dispute over online gambling.
Proceedings will continue before the 9th Federal Civil Court of São Paulo, where the relevant federal authorities must submit their reports before the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office delivers its opinion.
Stake may also seek a review of the decision before a judicial panel of the TRF3.
Meanwhile, the broader constitutional debate surrounding Provisional Measure No. 1,394/2026 remains before the Supreme Federal Court, under the responsibility of Justice Luiz Fux.
The coming decisions will be important in determining whether the restrictions continue to apply nationwide or whether the courts introduce changes to their scope.
Stake’s case represents one of the key judicial precedents in Brazil’s evolving regulatory environment, particularly because of the tension between previously granted licences and the uniform application of the national betting ban.
Editó: @fonta
