A Romanian court has rejected Polymarket’s appeal against its blacklisting by the country’s gambling regulator, cementing the prediction markets platform’s ban and handing European regulators another precedent to point to as they tighten the perimeter around unlicensed prediction market activity.
ONJN Wins the Legal Challenge
Vlad-Cristian Soare, President of Romania’s National Office for Gambling (ONJN), announced the court’s decision via LinkedIn on 2 April 2026. The appeal had been filed by Polymarket against the ONJN’s original decision to place it on the national blacklist of unauthorised gambling websites, a move that required internet service providers across Romania to block access to the platform.
The ONJN’s original ban, issued in late October 2025, followed a sharp increase in domestic activity during Romania’s presidential elections in May that year. Polymarket recorded over $600m in trades on the presidential race from Romanian users, with a further $15m tied to the Bucharest mayoral contest. Those volumes triggered the regulator’s formal intervention.
The regulatory argument was straightforward. Soare stated at the time that the decision had nothing to do with the technology involved. His position: if users wager money on a future outcome against a counterpart, that is gambling under Romanian law, regardless of whether stakes are denominated in lei or cryptocurrency. The court’s rejection of Polymarket’s appeal confirms that view holds legally.
“Regardless of whether you bet in lei or crypto, if you bet money on a future result, under the conditions of a counterpart bet, we are talking about gambling that must be licensed. ONJN will not allow the transformation of blockchain into a screen for illegal betting.” — Vlad-Cristian Soare, President, ONJN
A Pattern Across Europe
Romania’s ban was not the first in Europe, and the court’s endorsement of it fits a broader trend. Germany, Belgium, Italy, Poland, Hungary, the Netherlands, Switzerland, France, Portugal, and now Romania have all taken formal action to restrict prediction markets platforms operating without local licences. New Zealand has gone further, directly banning both Kalshi and Polymarket by name.
The core dispute is consistent across jurisdictions: prediction market operators argue they offer “events contracts,” a financial product distinct from gambling. Regulators respond that the operational structure, money wagered on uncertain outcomes against counterparties, satisfies the legal definition of betting regardless of labelling. Romanian courts have now sided with that regulatory logic.
In the UK, the Gambling Commission has stated that any prediction markets platform launching domestically would fall under gambling regulation. That position remains a statement of principle rather than enforcement, given no licensed platform has yet entered the UK market in this segment.
One notable counterpoint: Gibraltar has licensed a prediction markets platform as a B2C betting intermediary, suggesting that at least one European jurisdiction is willing to regulate rather than exclude. Soare signalled he sees the Romanian outcome differently. He framed the court ruling as another layer in the defensive infrastructure European regulators are building against unlicensed prediction market operators.
Polymarket’s Wider Regulatory Position
Polymarket’s European difficulties sit alongside a complicated global regulatory picture. The platform was previously subject to a fine from the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which pushed it out of the American market. It has been exploring a return via a licensed derivatives exchange route.
The ONJN also cited Polymarket’s failure to provide financial reports, implement anti-money laundering protocols, or put player protection measures in place as factors in the original ban. These are standard licence obligations in regulated markets, and their absence reinforced the regulator’s case that the platform was operating as an unlicensed gambling service.
For context on how prediction markets have developed in Europe and the regulatory response they have generated, see our coverage of the Massachusetts AG’s lawsuit against Kalshi and the wider regulatory environment shaping B2B licensing confidence. The Danish regulator’s position offers a contrasting example of how some European authorities remain limited in their ability to act without evidence of direct domestic targeting.
What Comes Next
The Romanian court ruling closes one avenue for Polymarket in that market. It also reinforces the position of ONJN and its counterparts across Europe that the “events contract” framing does not provide a regulatory shield. Soare described the outcome as adding another brick to the wall European regulators are constructing against unlicensed prediction markets activity.
Whether that wall will hold against Gibraltar’s more permissive approach, or whether a licensed pathway will eventually open in larger European markets, remains the central unresolved question for the sector.
Source: Romania Just.ro
