Brazil’s TRF3 overturns Stake’s injunction one day later and restores effects of the betting MP

The president of Brazil’s Federal Regional Court of the 3rd Region (TRF3), judge Luis Antonio Johonsom Di Salvo, suspended the injunction that had let Stake Brazil Ltd. keep operating past the deadline set by Provisional Measure No. 1.394/2026. For high-risk operators, the point is simple: a local court can buy time, but a higher-court suspension can take it back just as fast.

1. Di Salvo granted the Union’s request on Friday (9) in Suspension of Injunction and Judgment No. 5032238-54.2026.4.03.0000, ending the practical effect of the injunction issued a day earlier by federal judge Cristiane Farias Rodrigues dos Santos of the 9th Federal Civil Court of São Paulo in writ of mandamus No. 5030862-66.2026.4.03.6100.
2. The first-instance order had been narrow. It rejected Stake’s main request to suspend the MP and continue operating until 31 December 2029, the end date of the authorization granted under SPA/MF Ordinance No. 263/2025. But it partially accepted the alternative request and preserved, until 25 October, the provisional effectiveness of the operator’s authorization, blocked any automatic extinction of that authorization before that date, suspended the blocking, redirection, or unavailability of the domain stake.bet.br, and barred sanctions based solely on the operation continuing within the limits of the decision.
3. That temporary relief came with 12 obligations, including a ban on new campaigns and bonuses, a requirement to allow withdrawals of balances, and the maintenance of responsible-gaming mechanisms. In other words, the court gave the operator time, but not a free hand.
4. The Union argued to TRF3 that the injunction caused “grave injury to administrative public order” by setting aside, for a single operator, the effects of a public policy with national scope. It also claimed regulatory asymmetry, an undue advantage for Stake, and a risk of a multiplier effect if other operators filed similar lawsuits.
5. Di Salvo accepted that reasoning in full. According to the decision, the MP was designed to apply uniformly to all agents in the sector, and preserving one company’s authorization on a singular basis would be capable of undermining the coherence and effectiveness of administrative action. The judge also gave weight to the multiplier effect.

The suspension remains in force until the final judgment in the underlying mandamus action or until a further decision by the court presidency. In practical terms, that takes away the more than 16 days of breathing room the first injunction had provided.