SectorWire
SearchRegister
MenuClose

Italian appeal court acquits three defendants in Gambling case

Regulation1 min read

An Italian appeals court acquitted three defendants in the ordinary-procedure appeal in the Gambling investigation, overturning their 30 June 2025 trial-court judgment. The court ruled they had not committed the offences, excluded the alleged mafia association and related aggravating factor, and revoked confiscation of seized assets and civil awards; its reasons are due within 90 days.

An Italian appeal court acquitted three defendants in the Gambling investigation, overturning a trial court judgment from 30 June 2025. The court ruled that they had not committed the offences.

The decision excluded the defendants' participation in a mafia association and the related aggravating factor. Allegations concerning fraudulent transfers and unjustified possession of assets were also excluded. The judges revoked the confiscation of seized assets and civil awards to the civil parties.

The first-instance proceedings had narrowed the prosecution case, with numerous acquittals and the exclusion of 'ndrangheta involvement in the management of an online gambling company. The district anti-mafia directorate began the investigation in July 2015 following statements by justice collaborator Mario Gennaro. Investigators alleged that illegal online sports betting was run through a Maltese company operating within the orbit of the Tegano clan. Gennaro was considered the manager of the betting collection network and was identified at the time as a principal figure in the criminal group.

The court's reasons are due within 90 days.

Request a correction

Flag an issue

Keep reading

Regulation

Rome appeals court acquits CTD operator in case involving unlicensed bookmaker

Rome’s Court of Appeal acquitted a betting data-centre operator on 30 May 2026, ruling that the offence was not established. The case concerned a centre linked to a Maltese bookmaker without an ADM concession; the court said the evidence did not show that the operator accepted individual bets or paid winnings. It said proof of intermediation, such as local payout of winnings or sham betting accounts, was required.

Continue reading