Federal court revokes injunction that allowed CDA Gaming to operate in Brazil
Appeal by the AGU led to suspension of related lawsuits by the STF on 9 Nov 2026

Key Takeaways
- On 3 November 2026 Judge Adriana Pileggi granted an injunction to CDA Gaming that was later annulled by a Federal Court following an AGU appeal.
- The Advocacia‑Geral da União (AGU) appealed, arguing that operations should not resume while the constitutionality of Provisional Measure 1.394/2026 is under review.
- Judge Johonsom di Salvo revoked the injunction citing Article 4 of Law No. 8.437/1992 and the sub judice status before the STF.
- On 9 November 2026 STF Justice Luiz Fux suspended all lawsuits nationwide relating to the provisional measure until the STF issues a final ruling.
The Federal Court annulled the injunction that on 3 November 2026 Judge Adriana Pileggi had granted to CDA Gaming, which had allowed the company to continue operating in Brazil. The decision was appealed by the Advocacia‑Geral da União (AGU), which argued that authorising a resumption of operations is inappropriate while the constitutionality of Provisional Measure 1.394/2026 remains under review.
Reason for the revocation
Judge Johonsom di Salvo declined to maintain the injunction. He noted that the matter concerning bets in relation to the Provisional Measure is already "sub judice" before the Supreme Federal Court (STF) and that it would be inappropriate for lower courts to anticipate the STF’s understandings, citing Article 4 of Law No. 8.437/1992 as the legal basis for suspending the injunction. This follows wider discussion in [regulation](/regulation) about judicial coordination.
"As already stated in the previous decision, the issue of the ‘bets’ in light of the provisional measure is sub judice before the Supreme Federal Court, and it would be inconvenient for public order for lower courts to anticipate their understandings," said Johonsom di Salvo.
Judge Adriana Pileggi had argued that the rapid termination of licences harmed licensed operators and invoked constitutional principles such as legal certainty, reasonableness and proportionality.
Immediate effects and market situation
CDA Gaming had launched the Casa de Apostas and Betsul brands in Brazil before the injunction was revoked; its third brand, Jogo da Sorte, had not yet begun operations. The AGU requested that the STF suspend all lawsuits related to the constitutionality of Provisional Measure 1.394/2026 to avoid conflicting rulings in lower courts.
On 9 November 2026 STF Justice Luiz Fux granted the request made by Attorney General Paulo Gonet and suspended actions against the provisional measure until the STF issues a definitive decision. The STF also held a public hearing on betting regulation as part of its deliberations.
The industry now awaits further STF rulings on Provisional Measure 1.394/2026 and the future of the online gambling market in Brazil. More regulatory coverage.
Frequently Asked Questions
When was the injunction that allowed CDA Gaming to operate revoked?
The injunction granted on 3 November 2026 by Judge Adriana Pileggi was subsequently annulled by a Federal Court after an appeal by the Advocacia‑Geral da União.
Who appealed the decision authorising CDA Gaming to continue operating?
The Advocacia‑Geral da União (AGU) filed the appeal against the injunction, arguing that resumption of operations is improper while the constitutionality of Provisional Measure 1.394/2026 remains under review.
What action did the Supreme Federal Court take regarding lawsuits on the provisional measure?
On 9 November 2026 STF Justice Luiz Fux suspended all lawsuits across Brazil related to Provisional Measure 1.394/2026 until the STF issues a definitive decision.
Tags
About the author

Miguel Sandoval
Regulatory Affairs Correspondent
Miguel Sandoval tracks gambling legislation, licensing, and regulator enforcement — from Spain's DGOJ and the Latin American authorities to the UKGC, the MGA, and the state-by-state map in North America. The reports answer three questions precisely — what changed, where, and who it affects — with jurisdictions, dates, and penalties cited exactly as published. Operators and compliance officers read Miguel Sandoval to know which rulebook moved before their next meeting.
More from Miguel Sandoval








