Brazil's TRF3 Suspends Stake's Injunction After One Day, Citing Regulatory Asymmetry

The president of the Federal Regional Court of the 3rd Region has switched off the only court order that let a licensed operator trade through Brazil's betting ban, on the ground that one exception undermines a rule meant for everyone. Stake says its site and app have been down again since 10 October.

• Judge Luis Antonio Johonsom Di Salvo, president of the Federal Regional Court of the 3rd Region (TRF3), on 9 October suspended the injunction that let Stake operate until 25 October, a day after a São Paulo court granted it
• He acted on a suspension request from the federal government, not an ordinary appeal, and the suspension lasts until a final judgment in Stake's case or a further decision of the court's presidency
• His reasoning: one company operating while the rest of the sector is shut is a "regulatory asymmetry" that harms public order, and could invite copycat claims
• Stake's website and app have been unavailable again since 10 October, according to a notice on its site reported by Next.io and iGaming Expert
• Stake can file an agravo within five days, and its writ continues in São Paulo, but Brazil's licences end on 25 October under Provisional Measure 1.394 whatever happens in the case

A Court President Ends the Only Exemption From Brazil's Ban

Di Salvo signed the decision at 18:59 on Friday 9 October in suspension of injunction case 5032238-54.2026.4.03.0000, brought by the federal government against the 9th Federal Civil Court of São Paulo. It suspends the effects of the order Federal Judge Cristiane Farias Rodrigues dos Santos signed at 11:35 the previous morning in Stake's writ of mandamus, case 5030862-66.2026.4.03.6100.

That order had refused Stake's request to operate until its licence expires in 2029, but preserved its authorisation until 25 October and suspended the redirection of stake.bet.br, subject to 12 conditions including a ban on new promotions and bonuses.

The government did not use an ordinary appeal. It asked the court's president to suspend the injunction under Article 4 of Law 8.437 of 1992, an exceptional power to halt orders against the state to avoid "grave lesão à ordem, saúde, segurança e economia públicas" (grave harm to public order, health, safety and the economy). The Attorney General's Office (AGU) announced the result the same day, according to BPMoney; the AGU's own news pages require a login and could not be read. Stake had filed a submission opposing the request, the decision records.

The Reasoning: Uniform Rules, Copycat Claims and the STF

The decision says suspension "não é o reexame do acerto jurídico da decisão impugnada" (is not a re-examination of whether the challenged decision was legally right), but a check on its practical effects. On that test, the measure "foi concebida para incidência uniforme" (was designed to apply uniformly), and "a circunstância de apenas uma empresa permanecer autorizada a exercer regularmente a atividade econômica enquanto as demais se submetem às restrições estabelecidas pelo Poder Público evidencia assimetria regulatória" (the fact that only one company remains authorised to operate while the others submit to the restrictions set by the state shows a regulatory asymmetry), a risk to administrative order.

Di Salvo also cited a "potencial efeito multiplicador" (potential multiplier effect) of similar claims, and went further, writing that the ban "prestigia a proteção do consumidor/apostador" (favours the protection of the consumer and bettor) because the transparency of game mechanics is "notoriamente insuficiente" (notoriously insufficient) in a mass, permanent digital service. With the measure before the Supreme Federal Tribunal (STF) in ADIs 8024, 8027 and 8028, he added, it is "inconveniente que o Judiciário seja o agente da instabilidade" (inappropriate for the judiciary to be the agent of instability). The decision's opening paragraph names the petitioner as "Strike Brazil Ltda", though its header lists Stake Brazil Ltda.

Back Offline, With Two Routes Left

According to the notice reported by Next.io and iGaming Expert, Stake tells visitors the 8 October ruling let it resume operations, but that since 10 October its site and app "have been unavailable again". With the injunction suspended, the measure's effects return, including the redirection of stake.bet.br requested by the Justice Ministry, BNLData reported; Metrópoles noted that the decision itself contains no specific blocking order. Stake did not reply to Poder360's request for comment by Saturday.

Under Article 4 of Law 8.437, Stake has five days to file an agravo, to be judged at the session after it is filed. The writ itself continues at the 9th Court, where the authorities must report before the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office gives its opinion. In Brasília, a federal judge on 8 October threw out a writ from Futuras Apostas, operator of Brazino777, holding that a writ cannot challenge a law in the abstract, BNLData reported.

The Asymmetry Argument Cuts Against Every Operator, Not Just Stake

The ruling's force lies in its generality. Di Salvo did not address with the first-instance judge's point, that a measure giving licences 30 days cannot be enforced as if they ended on day one; he held that any lone exemption harms public order. That reasoning would apply to the next operator who wins an injunction, and Article 4 lets a court president extend a suspension to later identical injunctions by a simple addition to the original request. The National Association of Games and Lotteries' collective writ in Brasília, which asks only that members' sites return for customer service, may avoid the charge of a single winner, but not the reasoning that the courts should wait for the STF.

A Suspension Ruling That Reaches Into the Merits

The decision says it does not judge the legal merits, yet it states that the ban protects bettors, the question at the heart of the cases before Justice Luiz Fux. Stake's agravo will be the place to argue that point, and that the 12 conditions already limited its advantage. With 13 days left before 25 October, a win would buy very little. The R$30 million, approximately $5.8 million, Stake says it paid for the licence is lost under the measure's no-refund rule either way, and the government's attention has moved on to the wind-down, where it plans to sue eight former licensees over withheld refund data.

The first crack in Brazil's ban lasted about a day. Unless Fux or Congress acts first, operators are unlikely to find a second one in the federal courts.