TJSC Suspends Million-Real Freeze on Ana Gaming Brasil Accounts in Betting Case

The 4th Civil Chamber of the Santa Catarina Court of Justice (TJSC) suspended a precautionary freeze on bank accounts belonging to Ana Gaming Brasil S.A., the operator behind 7K, Vera.bet, and Cassino.bet. The court said the new Medida Provisória (Provisional Measure) No. 1.394/2026 does not, by itself, justify freezing a betting operator’s funds without proof of concrete risk.

1. The decision came from judge Leandro Passig Mendes in interlocutory appeal No. 5103470-11.2026.8.24.0000. It overturned a first-instance order that had frozen funds from six operators solely on the basis of the new MP.
2. The case was filed by Gleicinara Vanessa Nicoli de Andrade before the 1st Civil Court of Blumenau. She claims a gambling addiction diagnosis and is seeking damages from the operators. Ana Gaming was represented by Udo Seckelmann, Thiago Stüssi, and Beatriz Braz of Bichara e Motta Advogados.
3. The court said pre-service arrest is an exceptional measure and requires proof of a concrete risk of asset concealment, dissipation, or diversion. In Ana Gaming’s case, the court found that no such proof had been shown. That matters for PSPs and acquirers because the ruling draws a line between a legislative change and a standalone basis for asset restraint.
4. The judge also pointed out that the provisional measure itself requires operators to maintain liquidity for full repayment of amounts owed to bettors, with those funds kept segregated under penalty of a daily fine. It also preserves company liability for obligations incurred during the period in which they were authorized to operate, without ordering dissolution.
5. On the record before the court, there was no formal ludopathy report, no prior notice of the condition to the operator, and no request for limitation, suspension, or self-exclusion that had gone unanswered. The court also noted that self-exclusion does not apply retroactively to bets placed earlier, and that the blocked amount had been set only on the basis of the complaint, without comparison against bank statements.

The immediate effect is procedural, but the signal is practical: in Brazil’s betting sector, asset freezes still need evidence, not just a new rule on paper. The merits of the appeal will still be reviewed by the 4th Civil Chamber of the TJSC.