Rainbet: the check written twice, with a number in neither

A repeated clause looks, on first reading, like a sign of rigour. On this record it works the other way: the same power written into two different places in the document, with either of them leaving it unlimited.

Two clauses, zero numbers

Identity verification appears in clause 5.2 and appears again in 8.3. An amount above which papers start being required is missing from both, and we recorded a delivery deadline nowhere, along with any closed list of accepted means.

What that describes is a power rather than a procedure.

Read it twice and it stays a power. A clause without a number triggers as readily at 20 € as at 2000 €, and writing that power twice leaves it exactly as unpredictable for the player — while making it harder to argue around.

Three houses in the table do the opposite and publish a figure: Rocketpot, Bitcasino.io and Empire.io. The other seven, this one included, write discretion. The two forms are compared column by column in best online casino.

The 2 500,00€ to 25 000,00€ band attached to online play comes from this regulator page. Inside Decreto-Lei n.º 66/2015 that band belongs to serious offences, in article 61.º, paragraph 5, point b, while playing on an unlicensed site sits in article 58.º, paragraph 2, among the minor ones, with a ceiling of 2500 € under point c.

Who answers, and where the licence number stands

The holding company is RBGAMING N.V. The licence is ALSI-152406029-FI2, from the Anjouan Gaming Board, with status recorded as valid, and it points at the licensor’s public register rather than at an individual record of that document.

Nine cryptocurrencies recorded; the list opens with BTC, ETH and LTC. A sportsbook exists, and so does cryptographic verification of game results. We recorded a payout ceiling, a game count, suppliers and a start year nowhere — empty means we failed to read it, rather than that it is absent.

What Portuguese law does with this

RBGAMING N.V. is absent from the SRIJ register, and the Anjouan permit produces effects in Portugal in zero degree: the fourth paragraph of article 5.º of the Regime Jurídico dos Jogos e Apostas Online prohibits the operation and the playing of unregulated online games and bets. The nineteen entities entered on 2 September are listed in legal online casinos in Portugal.

For the player, article 58.º classes play at a site like this as a minor administrative offence, with a fine of up to 2500 € for an individual under point c) of article 61.º. The arithmetic behind the two figures circulating about it sits in the player’s fine.

How the contrast reads from the licensed side

Writing down what an operator on the Portuguese register is barred from doing is worth the space, because it is the best mirror for a discretionary clause.

Orientação n.º 1/2017/SRIJ/JO, of 23 January, allows the operating entity to set minimum and maximum stakes, but only «desde que os referidos limites se apliquem a todos os jogadores, sem exceção» — provided those limits apply to every player, without exception — and expressly bars the limitation from being used as an instrument for preventing or punishing irregularities. And point j) of article 26.º, read with point a) of article 30.º, requires those limits to be published on the site itself.

So: on the licensed side, a rule applied to one customer and withheld from another is unlawful, and a rule that exists has to stand in plain view. Outside it, what governs is the drafting of the contract — and two clauses without a number are the exact opposite of a published rule. The regulator’s three guidance notes are summarised in free online casino.

We hold an account at this operator in zero quantity and an experience of playing is described in none of this page. The source is the terms published on the site itself and the licensor’s public register. The method sits in how we read the documents.