Minas Gerais court upholds Novibet account closure after coordinated betting activity

A first-instance ruling in Minas Gerais found Novibet’s account closure and the cancellation of R$ 22,310.68 in winnings to be lawful after antifraud systems flagged coordinated account use. For PSPs and sportsbook operators, the point is simple: courts are willing to back enforcement when the platform can show technical evidence and clear rules.

1. The case was heard by the 2nd Special Civil Court of the District of Sete Lagoas, which rejected both the claim for R$ 22,310.68 and a separate request for R$ 10,000 in moral damages. The case was defended for Novibet by José Frederico Cimino Manssur and Sarah Vokurka of Natal & Manssur Advogados.
2. According to the proceedings, antifraud tools identified that the claimant’s account and another user’s account shared the same IP address and the same physical device, identified by a unique hardware and software code. The court also looked at the timing of the bets: after a bet was limited on the other user’s account, the claimant accessed the platform from the same device and IP, made an unusually high deposit, and placed the same bet four minutes later.
3. The judge also noted matching details in the addresses provided by the two accounts. On that basis, the court found that the winnings came from conduct prohibited by the platform’s rules and therefore did not create an enforceable claim. The claimant’s original deposit had already been returned.
4. The decision cited Law No. 14.790/2023 and SPA/MF Ordinance No. 1.231/2024, saying operators have a duty to prevent fraud. In the court’s reading, the framework allows suspension or closure of accounts and cancellation of bets in cases of fraud or breach of the terms of use.
5. José Frederico Cimino Manssur said the ruling shows operators need to act when there are consistent signs of irregularity, but not on the basis of a single data point. His point is the operational one that matters: if a bookmaker blocks, reverses, or closes an account, it needs the evidence trail to be there — device data, IP, registration details, and bet sequencing — or the dispute gets a lot more expensive.

The case number is 1008109-62.2026.8.13.0672. For regulated betting and the PSPs that serve it, this is another reminder that antifraud controls are no longer just internal risk management; they are part of the legal defense when a player challenges a closure or voided winnings.