Illegales Online-Glücksspiel und Rom II-VO

Illegal Online Gambling and the Rome II Regulation. A Plea for Consumer Protection in Private International Law Beyond Contracts. In Wunner, the CJEU held that for claims seeking compensation for losses at illegal online gambling, the place where the damage occurred within the meaning of Art. 4 para. 1 of the Rome II Regulation is the player's habitual residence. In doing so, the court effectively transferred principles of the conflict-of-laws rule for consumer contracts in Art. 6 para. 1 of the Rome I Regulation to non-contractual obligations. The judgment raises the broader question of whether such a conflict-of-laws mechanism to protect consumers should exist only in contract law. This article argues that the answer should be no: A conflict-of-laws rule for consumers should be introduced into the Rome II Regulation. The CJEU's case law is no substitute for such a rule, because its potential for extension is limited, and other aspects of consumer protection in private international law are unaffected by it. The article also shows that online gambling cases should de lege lata be governed not by Art. 4 but by Art. 5 of the Rome II Regulation. And while the latter may also point to the law of the player's habitual residence, it affords insufficient consumer protection and is also no substitute for a dedicated conflicts rule for consumers.