TRF-1 overturns injunction granted to Spribe over Aviator in Brazil

Brazil’s Federal Regional Court of the 1st Region has denied Spribe’s preventive injunction request against the Ministry of Finance’s Secretariat of Prizes and Bets (SPA/MF), leaving the regulator free to consider measures related to Aviator. For PSPs, acquirers, and operators in Brazil, the practical point is simple: the regulatory overhang around one of the best-known games in the market is still there.

1. The 13th Federal Civil Court of the Federal District rejected Spribe’s request for an injunction in a preventive writ of mandamus against the SPA/MF. Spribe wanted to stop the agency from suspending or restricting Aviator’s technical certificates, or from taking other regulatory steps tied to the product.
2. The action followed a Public Prosecutor’s recommendation that the SPA/MF assess suspending Aviator while it investigates signs that the same game is being offered both by duly authorized operators and by illegal betting platforms in Brazil. The investigation also covers possible effects on the integrity of the regulated market and consumer protection.
3. The injunction was revoked after an earlier decision by the Federal Court of Brasília temporarily suspended the effects of the AVIATOR trademark registration at the National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI) and barred Spribe from relying on exclusivity based on that registration while a federal nullity case is pending. With that foundation weakened, the court found that the earlier assumption of full validity had changed materially.
4. In denying the injunction, the court said there was not enough likelihood of the claimed right. It also noted that the Brazilian authorities’ investigation is not limited to distribution on illegal platforms: they are also examining signs of the same product being supplied to both authorized and unauthorized operators, possible divergences between the RTP (return to player) disclosed and the RTP actually practiced on clandestine platforms, and potential impacts on consumer protection, market integrity, and competition.
5. The court relied on Article 296 of the Brazilian Code of Civil Procedure, which allows provisional relief to be reviewed when the facts or legal basis that supported the original order change. With the injunction denied, the SPA remains free to evaluate the Public Prosecutor’s recommendation and adopt regulatory measures within its powers while the investigation continues.

For operators licensed to offer Aviator in Brazil, the message is not subtle: legal and compliance scrutiny can keep going until the pending proceedings are resolved. For payment firms and other infrastructure providers, that usually means more counterparty review, more monitoring, and less appetite for anything that looks like it sits too close to a disputed product.