Facts
The Swiss Casino Association (SCV) filed a complaint against the decision of the Federal Administrative Court, which held that certain "Texas Hold'em No Limit (Freeze Out)" poker tournaments should be classified as games of skill and not as gambling within the meaning of the Gambling Act. The Federal Gaming Commission (ESBK) had previously qualified these poker tournaments as permissible under the Gambling Act.
The Federal Supreme Court overturned the decision of the Federal Administrative Court and dismissed the request of the complainant. It concluded that the disputed poker tournaments are to be qualified as gambling within the meaning of the Gambling Act, the conduct of which outside of licensed casinos is prohibited.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court stated that poker has traditionally been regarded as a game of chance and that the legislator had based the Gambling Act on this understanding. The distinction between games of chance and games of skill cannot be made on the basis of a single criterion, but requires an overall assessment. In particular, the protective purpose of the Gambling Act must be taken into account, namely the guarantee of a safe, supervised gaming operation, the prevention of organized crime and money laundering, as well as the prevention of socially harmful effects.
The Federal Supreme Court concluded that in the disputed "Texas Hold'em" poker tournaments, the element of chance predominates and they are therefore to be qualified as gambling within the meaning of the Gambling Act. A…