Brazil Federal Court dismisses Brazino777’s injunction against MP 1.394 without reaching the merits

The Federal Court of the Federal District ended, without reviewing the substance, a mandado de segurança filed by Futuras Apostas Ltda., the operator behind Brazino777 (brazino777.bet.br), against the effects of Medida Provisória No. 1.394/2026. For PSPs and high-risk operators, the key point is procedural: the court treated the dispute as an attack on a general rule, not on a concrete administrative act.

1. The decision was signed this Thursday (8) by substitute federal judge Francisco Valle Brum of the 21st Federal Civil Court of the Federal District, one day after the case was filed. The court said the writ was filed through the wrong procedural route, so the request for interim relief was never considered on its own.
2. Futuras Apostas, authorized to operate Brazino777 under Portaria SPA/MF No. 466 of 10 March 2025, asked the Secretary of Prizes and Betting at the Ministry of Finance to refrain from treating its authorization as expired, revoked, or disregarded. It also asked that no steps be taken to block the continuation of the operation or impose the obligations and sanctions of the compulsory wind-down regime until final judgment.
3. The company argued that MP 1.394, issued on 25 September, is unconstitutional, along with the acts tied to its immediate application. It also cited Portaria SPA/MF No. 3.005, of 2 October, which set procedures, workflows, and final deadlines for operators to comply with their obligations. The case value was set at R$ 1 million.
4. In the court’s view, both the provisional measure and the portaria “have a general and abstract character” and therefore cannot be treated as administrative acts with concrete effects. The judge noted that there was no concrete act actually taken against the company in the case file, because the extinction of authorizations follows directly from the text of the MP itself.
5. The ruling quoted article 4 of the provisional measure, under which authorizations granted under Law No. 14.790/2023 will expire 30 days after publication, with no right to a refund of the outorga or to compensation from the government. The judge also relied on STF Summary 266, which bars mandado de segurança against law in the abstract, and cited STJ and TRF-1 precedents in the same direction.

The court also said mandado de segurança cannot be used to obtain a broad declaration of unconstitutionality, since that would intrude on the function of concentrated constitutional review. According to the ruling, the constitutionality of MP 1.394 is already being challenged before the STF in ADIs 8024 and 7721. The security was denied under articles 6, § 5, and 10 of Law No. 12.016/2009, together with article 485, item VI, of the Civil Procedure Code. No costs or attorneys’ fees were awarded, and the decision can be appealed.