Curaçao court dismisses suit and upholds critic's freedom of expression
Court rejects removal demands and advance damages of XCG130,000 in case involving gambling sector commentary.
Key Takeaways
- The Court of First Instance of Curaçao dismissed the lawsuit against Luigi Angelo Faneyte on 6 November 2026.
- Plaintiffs Mario Fiorini, Phaedra Hanst and IGA Trust B.V. sought removals, corrections, publication bans and an advance payment of XCG130,000 (about €64,000).
- The court ruled Faneyte's publications were protected by freedom of expression and did not constitute unlawful conduct.
- All remedies requested by the plaintiffs were dismissed and the plaintiffs were ordered to pay Faneyte's legal costs.
A court in Curaçao dismissed a lawsuit brought by businessman Mario Fiorini, Phaedra Hanst and igaming firm IGA Trust B.V. against commentator and journalist Luigi Angelo Faneyte, ruling on 6 November 2026 that Faneyte's publications were protected by freedom of expression. The plaintiffs had sought content removals, corrections, publication bans and an advance damages payment of XCG130,000 (about €64,000); the Court of First Instance of Curaçao rejected all remedies and ordered the plaintiffs to pay Faneyte's legal costs.
Court finds gambling regulation debate to be a matter of public interest
The court's decision emphasised that matters of gambling regulation and licensing reform are of significant public interest and that public figures must tolerate a higher degree of criticism. Judges assessed the balance between the right to freedom of expression and protection of personal reputation and concluded that Faneyte's articles, public statements and criminal complaints fell within lawful public debate on Curaçao's online gambling sector and licensing framework.
The dispute concerned a series of publications and public comments by Faneyte, including commentary following a January 2024 interview featuring Mario Fiorini and criminal complaints Faneyte filed in late 2024 alleging irregularities in licensing and industry practices. The court explicitly noted it was not ruling on the truth of Faneyte's allegations; rather, it found insufficient grounds to restrict his speech or to award damages.
Remedies sought and court's response
The plaintiffs requested the following from the Court of First Instance of Curaçao:
removal of publications and corrections to content
publication bans and other restrictions
an advance payment of XCG130,000 in damages
The court dismissed each demand. Judges concluded that Faneyte's publications did not amount to unlawful conduct and therefore did not meet the threshold for the remedies sought. The court also rejected Faneyte's counterclaim seeking a declaration about alleged misuse of legal proceedings and references to anti-SLAPP protections.
"The publications were protected by freedom of expression and did not constitute unlawful conduct," the court found, characterising the debate over regulation and licensing as a public-interest discussion.
Case background and legal posture
Luigi Angelo Faneyte is an economist, lecturer and online commentator who has been a prominent critic of Curaçao's gambling sector and a regular voice on regulatory reform and licensing questions. The contested material included his articles, public statements and the criminal complaints he submitted in late 2024 relating to alleged irregularities in the former licensing regime and the introduction of the National Ordinance on Games of Chance (LOK).
The plaintiffs — Mario Fiorini, Phaedra Hanst and IGA Trust B.V. — argued that Faneyte's statements damaged their reputations by alleging involvement in corruption and fraud. The court observed that Fiorini had engaged in public debate about gambling legislation and licensing reform and therefore must tolerate a higher level of scrutiny.
Discussion of Curaçao's licensing system and the LOK was treated by the judges as part of an ongoing public-policy conversation rather than a private dispute.
Outcome and costs
All remedies sought by the plaintiffs were dismissed. The court ordered the plaintiffs to pay Faneyte's legal costs in the main proceedings. The judgment does not establish the factual accuracy of Faneyte's allegations; it determines only that the threshold for restricting speech or awarding damages was not met in this instance.
The ruling underscores the court's position that public debate on gambling regulation and licensing in Curaçao sits within the protections afforded to freedom of expression, even where allegations have not been proven. Readers seeking the regulatory context can consult reporting on Curaçao's regulatory changes and the National Ordinance on Games of Chance (LOK) in the regulation section of this site.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why did the Curaçao court dismiss the lawsuit against Luigi Angelo Faneyte?
The court dismissed the lawsuit because it found Faneyte's publications and comments about Curaçao's gambling sector were protected by freedom of expression and did not amount to unlawful conduct. Judges determined the debate over gambling regulation and licensing reform is a matter of public interest and that public figures like Mario Fiorini must tolerate greater criticism.
What remedies were the plaintiffs seeking from the court?
The plaintiffs sought removal and correction of content, publication bans and an advance damages payment of XCG130,000 (about €64,000). The Court of First Instance of Curaçao rejected all those remedies.
Did the court rule that Faneyte's allegations were true?
No. The court did not rule on the factual accuracy of Faneyte's allegations. It stated there were insufficient grounds to conclude he had acted unlawfully and therefore did not make a finding of truth.
What specific materials and events formed the basis of the dispute?
The dispute centred on a series of articles, public statements and criminal complaints by Faneyte, including commentary following a January 2024 interview featuring Mario Fiorini and criminal complaints filed in late 2024 concerning alleged irregularities in licensing and industry practices.
Tags
About the author
Eleanor Whitfield
Regulatory Affairs Correspondent
Eleanor Whitfield tracks gambling legislation, licensing decisions, and regulator enforcement across key markets — from the UKGC, MGA, and Germany's GGL to Spain's DGOJ and the state-by-state map in the Americas. The reporting answers three questions precisely: what changed, where, and who it affects, with jurisdictions, effective dates, and penalty figures named exactly as published. Compliance officers and operators read Eleanor Whitfield to know which rulebook moved before their next board meeting.
More from Eleanor Whitfield
