TRF3 reinstates authorization for CDA Gaming, and Casa de Apostas and Betsul are once again permitted to operate.
Federal Judge Adriana Pileggi, of the 3rd Panel of the Regional Federal Court of the 3rd Region (TRF3), granted on Tuesday (November 3rd) an advance ruling on appeal to CDA Gaming Ltda. The company operates the brands Casa de Apostas , Betsul, and Jogo Online. The decision provisionally reinstates the authorization to operate fixed-odds betting, which was extinguished by Provisional Measure No. 1.394/2026. It was signed at 2 pm, in Appeal No. 5034200-15.2026.4.03.0000.
The decision applies exclusively to the appellant. It removes the extinguishing effects of Article 4 of the Provisional Measure on the authorization granted by Ordinance SPA/MF No. 255/2025 and, to the extent necessary for its compliance, the restrictions of Article 7. It also removes the effects of Official Letter No. 1256/2026/GAB-SEDIGI/SEDIGI/MJ, from the National Secretariat of Digital Rights. The judge also ordered that the electronic domains and the operational, financial, and payment services essential to the activity be restored. The measure is valid until the final judgment of the writ of mandamus or a new judicial decision, "preserving the applicable regulatory requirements and state oversight."
The first instance court had denied it.
CDA Gaming has appealed the decision of the 26th Federal Civil Court of São Paulo. In the proceedings of Writ of Mandamus No. 5031432-52.2026.4.03.6100, the court denied the preliminary injunction, understanding that the public interest in protecting the population against the negative effects of gambling should prevail over the legal security claimed by the company.
The operator reported having paid R$ 30 million for the license, valid until December 31, 2029. It requested the resumption of operations. As an alternative, it requested at least the maintenance of back-office systems, banking interfaces, and customer service channels necessary for refunding bettors and sending information to regulators. The main request was granted.
"Magical power" and confiscation
The reasoning is harsh regarding the provisional measure. According to the rapporteur, the concession required "substantial financial and technical investments" from the company. The argument of public interest cannot ignore these investments, "as if this public interest did not exist at the time of the agreement and has only now emerged."
The judge stated that the termination of the authorizations within such a short timeframe violates the principles of legal certainty, reasonableness, and proportionality. She also considered that the constitutional requirements of relevance and urgency for the issuance of provisional measures (Article 62 of the Constitution) were absent.
According to the decision, the expression "public interest" does not give the Administration "the magical power to suddenly alter what was agreed upon" with the contractor. The rapporteur pointed out that the Provisional Measure does not provide for the return of the grant (sole paragraph of article 4) nor compensation, which would constitute "a true confiscation." She also criticized the daily fine of R$ 200 provided for in paragraph 2 of article 8.
Regarding the government's justification that regulatory instruments did not ensure adequate protection for health, consumers, children, and families, the judge ironically remarked: "Well, the Provisional Measure would be a miracle, it would solve everything!" She concluded that this approach "is unacceptable from a legal standpoint."
The decision cites tax law experts Roque Carrazza and Heleno Taveira Torres to support the supremacy of the Constitution and the centrality of legal certainty. The rapporteur defined this guarantee as "the principle of no surprise."
Next Steps
They were summoned to respond, pursuant to article 1.019, II, of the CPC:
⇒ the National Secretary for Digital Rights;
⇒ the National Secretary of Public Security;
⇒ the Secretary of Prizes and Betting at the Ministry of Finance;
⇒ the president of the Central Bank.
The Union (National Treasury) is listed as an interested party.
The trend is that the Union will try to overturn the decision. In the case of Stake, the partial injunction granted by the 9th Federal Civil Court of São Paulo was suspended by the president of the TRF3 at the request of the Union. This time, however, the favorable decision comes from a judge, at the second instance, and with reasoning that questions the very constitutionality of the Provisional Measure.
The decision comes on the same day as the public hearing convened by Minister Luiz Fux of the Supreme Federal Court (STF) in ADI 8027, which questions Provisional Measure 1.394. The operators' authorizations were revoked on October 25, 30 days after the measure was published. In Congress, the Provisional Measure will begin blocking the agenda on November 9.
Preliminary injunction from the 3rd Panel of the Federal Regional Court of the 3rd Region.
