By Rob van der Gaast

The Dane Henrik Norsk Hoffmann, 30, studied law at University of Copenhagen, Denmark, and at the University of Queensland, Australia. Hoffman, an attorney with Danish firm Danders & More, specializes in gambling law and is considered the country's leading expert in that area. He is also member of the international organization International Masters of Gaming Law. Hoffman's desire to be more involved in the international gambling industry has even led him to prepare for the German bar exam.

IGN: How did you get in touch with the gambling industry?

Henrik Norsk Hoffmann: By chance, really. I got a job at a small law firm in Germany, which specialized in gaming, and since many of the clients were international companies corresponding in English, my English skills put me in the center of the gaming law advice we were offering the gaming industry.

IGN: What type clients do you have in the gambling industry?

HNH: Denmark is one of the smaller markets, and on top we have a monopoly, which means that the first reply you have to give a client is “That sounds great, but it is illegal.” However, I have managed at this early stage of my career to have between 15 and 20 regular gaming clients. I’m often contacted by people who are working on business plans to set up gaming services and I work as well for online operators based in Canada, Gibraltar and the United Kingdom. And above that I am the attorney of the Danish Poker Association, Wauwgaming.com.

IGN: Can you explain how gambling law and advertising standards cross paths in Denmark?

HNH: Well, we have a monopoly in Denmark, and the act that secures this monopoly prohibits all kinds of advertising for operators without a license in Denmark. However, due to harmonized EU legislation on TV broadcasting, the foreign operators have certain opportunities for advertising on the numerous Danish channels, which are in fact broadcast from the United Kingdom.

Both monopolies, Danske Spil and Klasselotteriet (Denmark’s official class lottery), are allowed to advertise in the same way as any other non gaming-related business in Denmark, meaning that they can advertise across the written media, radio, TV and the Internet as they see fit.

It is however included in Danske Spil’s license that it should limit advertising to an appropriate level. But, on the other hand, the High Court stated in its decision in the Ladbrokes case that it was appropriate and even necessary that Danske Spil maintains its level of advertising -- its advertising budget is larger than Carlsberg and Coca-Cola combined, and Danske Spil is thereby the far largest advertiser in Denmark -- to secure that the Danes do not get tempted by the evil private operators... thereby completely disregarding the fact that Danske Spil, despite increasing marketing budgets, constantly loses market shares to the private operators.

IGN: Are the six Danish casinos allowed to advertise?

HNH: Yes, they are!

IGN: Can Danish authorities block foreign gambling Web sites?

HNH: Yes, they can: technically as well as legally. However, as long as the Ladbrokes case is pending before the Supreme Court and until a potential law suit from the European Commission against Denmark is decided before the European Court of Justice, I doubt that the Danish authorities will do more than they are doing right now.

IGN: Why do you mention “Denmark - The next battlefield for gambling lobbyists”?

HNH: I mention this because I, in a joint venture with the Danish Public Affairs company Gunbak PA, have started a lobby project for the Danish/Scandinavian markets.

Per citizen, the Scandinavian markets are among the most lucrative gambling markets in the world, since the Scandinavians in general are financially well-off, and since gambling has become part of Scandinavian tradition. Furthermore, Denmark has proud traditions for political activity and democratic participation from the population.

Due to the Ladbrokes’ case -- and in particular, the poker case -- gaming has become a popular topic in Denmark. Gunbak PA and I have conducted an analysis, which indicates that a focused lobby campaign in Denmark has a high chance of success if initiated right now (within a month or two). However, if it is not initiated this spring, the political agenda will most likely not be favorable to gaming lobbyism for at least three to five years.

As Denmark is one of the EU members, which traditionally protects its monopoly most forcefully, choosing Denmark as the next battlefield for gambling lobbyists would most likely help in creating political results for the industry -- both in Denmark and outside -- particularly in our Scandinavian neighbor states.

I strongly believe that the key to a regulated competitive European gambling market is through the individual member states’ parliaments; and since Denmark politically is as ready as it will ever be, and since it is a small country, Denmark would be an ideal place to start intensive and focused lobbying in the European Union.

IGN: What are the three most important gambling verdicts in Denmark?

HNH: Ladbrokes’ case against the Danish Ministry of Taxation is among the most important cases. Ladbrokes has challenged the Act on Certain Games, Lotteries and Betting, which is the legal basis for the Danish gaming monopoly, Danske Spil. This case can be considered the Danish Gambelli case, as it is questioning the entire Danish gambling legislation. At the moment it is pending at the Danish Supreme Court, and hopefully it will be sent to the ECJ soon.

If Ladbrokes wins this case it is indeed possible that the Danish Monopoly would be abolished; then, we finally get Danish gambling legislation that is in conformity with the European treaty.

Another important case is the criminal case against the former chairman of the board of the Danish Poker Association. The main -- if not the only -- legal issue of this case is the classification of Texas Hold’em Poker Tournaments as a game of chance or a game of skill. In the first instance the District Court of Lyngby (suburb of Copenhagen) found that Texas Hold’em is a game of skill. However, the Eastern Division of the High court overruled this verdict just before the new year.

The verdict of the High Court, however, is based on case law which is older than the legislation, which it is applied to interpret, and which is a couple of decades older than Texas Hold’em. To cut a long story short, it is in my opinion a clearly political decision, without much legal merit. Therefore, I hope that the Danish Poker Association will be permitted to appeal the case to the Danish Supreme Court.

One of the problems in Denmark is that not many cases regarding gambling have occurred before the Danish Courts. Therefore, we do not have many important verdicts. One, which is worth mentioning, would be another Eastern Division of the High Court decision from 1975. The case regarded a variation of Texas Hold’em known in Denmark as Manila poker, which is a variation played like Texas Hold’em, but with a deck of 32 cards instead of 52, and where there is no flop with three cards at a time. Instead, the community cards are turned face up one at a time.

However, despite the fact that the prosecution based its entire case on this verdict in the case against the Danish Poker Association, the Eastern Division of the Danish High Court completely disregarded this verdict in its reasoning in December 2007. So even though this case regarded a game that comes somewhat close to Texas Hold’em, the High Court decided to refer to a case from 1926 where five-card draw poker was played, as well as to a decision from 1950, which mainly regarded other card games than poker. In other words the High Court does not consider this 1975 verdict important, even though everyone else involved with Danish gaming law does.

IGN: Do you have any other casework in the legal pipeline?

HNH: I hope that we will see the poker case before the Supreme Court, and depending on the outcome of the Ladbrokes case, we might see a lot of cases against the bulk of the Danish media regarding violation of the prohibition of advertising for gaming services online.

IGN: Which gambling-related court case has been your most important so far? Why?

HNH: My most important gambling case was/is without comparison the case for the Danish Poker Association. It is regarding a question that courts and attorneys are dealing with all over the world, and if we get a permit to appeal it to the Danish Supreme Court and if we can win it there, then my guess is that it will serve as precedent outside Denmark as well.

However, the most important thing about this case is that we manage to create so much public attention on the issue that the Minister of Justice, Lene Espersen, decided to establish a committee, of which I am a member, with the task of finding a way to change the Danish gaming legislation so that playing poker tournaments outside the scope of the Danish state monopoly and outside the casinos will be legal.

IGN: Do you play poker?

HNH: I play a bit with friends and colleagues, but my skills playing this complex strategy game are still at a level where most of my clients could win everything of value to me, with their eyes closed, while they were playing five games online simultaneously. To me, playing poker is about spending an evening with friends, and if any of us wanted it serious, I suppose we should quit the beers, shut up and focus on the game.

IGN: Is there any chance at all that Denmark will liberalize its online sports betting market?

HNH: There is indeed a chance, but the way things look right now it will require a lot of effort.

The Danes are generally not fond of monopolies, and gaming is no different. However, at the moment, the Danish state monopoly is the only gaming provider, which debates whether or not Denmark should maintain its monopoly.

Surprisingly enough, Danske Spil advocates the view that maintaining its monopoly is the only way to protect the Danes from the evil crime syndicates offering online gaming from mysterious foreign locations such as the United Kingdom, Malta, and Gibraltar. These evil entities are, according to Danske Spil and parts of the Danish news media, corrupting our youth and creating pathological gamblers amongst the Danes in outrageous numbers.

However, no one seems to care if Danske Spil’s outlets sell sports betting to kids aged between 11 and 15 -- and the fact that Danske Spil’s random number generator was not exactly as random as one could have wished was not sufficiently newsworthy for the media to mention it.

If the private operators wish to change things here, then right now (2008) is the time to do it. Next year the political agenda will be occupied by environment issues due to the climate conference, and after that the next election will begin to put issues on the agenda.

Right now there is a lot of focus on gaming in Denmark, and we just had parliamentary elections in November 2007, and therefore potentially will not have another election for almost 4 years. But the industry needs to get started within a month or two if they really wish to get rid of Danske Spil’s monopoly.

IGN: What do you think of the role of Internal Market Commissioner Charlie McCreevy? Is he on the right track? If not, what could he still do?

HNH: I think the Commissioner is on the right path considering the political climate he has to operate in. I sincerely hope that a lawsuit before the ECJ is coming very soon, but that being said I think the industry overestimates the influence the commission in Brussels and the ECJ in Luxemburg have on the member states’ national gaming monopolies in the European Union.

I agree with the approach that pressure from European Union will help improve things, but on the other hand the experience from Germany over the last 18 months gives us a good indication of a likely scenario if the ECJ finds that the national monopolies are in violation of the European Treaty.

The Constitutional Court in Germany found the German monopolies to be in violation of the German constitution and ordered the 16 states to change the legislation. This they did, which resulted in even less liberal monopoly legislation than the original. Most German commentators also agree that the new legislation is illegal, but it will take years of litigation before the courts before the new legislation is forced to change again by the courts.

This way, the monopolies will be able to maintain their position indefinitely simply by making small alterations, which materially change the structure of the legislation but in reality do not move the market forward toward a regulated, competitive market. Therefore, the real effort from the private operators should be mainly in the individual member states, and not at an EU level.

IGN: What is your biggest passion or hobby?

HNH: As a former elite athlete (competitive swimmer) I am still very much in to most kinds of sports, and enjoy almost any kind of sports. I have always had a special interest in cars and motor sports, and I love to cook. Finally, I enjoy developing and implementing business ideas.

IGN: Besides journalists, what is irritates you the most about the gambling industry?

HNH: In fact, I see journalists as key players in the quest for a regulated competitive European gambling market. The only journalists who irritate me are the journalists which do not take a critical stand toward the very biased information they receive from Danske Spil regarding gambling in Denmark.

My main frustration as a member of the international gambling industry is that the only political stakeholders that seemingly do not have coordinated their political efforts nationally are the private operators.

I appreciate that the private operators are competitors, and that at the moment legal situation is so unclear that neither the authorities nor the operators know exactly what the rules are. However, at some stage, initiatives like the ones in the United States and Germany will be taken by the legislators to simply complicate the operation of online gaming to an extent where publiclylisted companies will have serious difficulties operating -- considering in particular that they have to compete against state monopolies on the one side, and non-regulated and non-taxpaying operators on the other.

Therefore, I find it frustrating that the propaganda of Danske Spil and the input from the Danish Institute for Pathological Gambling, which represents a few thousand pathological gamblers out of millions of gambling Danes without gambling problems, are the only two voices heard in this debate.

I believe that a fair solution for all stakeholders can be found, but for that to happen all stakeholders will have to participate in the debate.

Henrik Norsk Hoffmann's profile

Henrik specialises in gaming law, international commercial law and international commercial arbitration law and is the leading gaming law specialist in Denmark.

In 2002, Henrik graduated with law degrees from the University of Copenhagen, Denmark, and the University of Queensland, Australia.

Because of his background and through advising international and in particular German companies on various issues of commercial and corporate law, Henrik is very internationally focused, and has a great deal of experience with the challenges, legal as well as cultural and commercial, an international business faces when starting up in an new jurisdiction. As a leading Danish specialist in gaming law, Henrik is a member of the organisation International Masters of Gaming Law, and he speaks at international conferences on gaming law related issues at a regular basis.

In a recent case, Henrik won a landmark decision on behalf the Danish Poker Association, when the district court in Lyngby ruled that poker is a game of skill and not a game of chance.

Henrik is fluent in English and German, as he has been living in Germany for a number of years.