Installation of gaming machines in a leisure centre is prohibited – 'Bowling alley remains a sports hall'

The installation of gaming machines brings gambling law into contact with modern leisure worlds

Gaming law regulation has for years been caught in the tension between traditional restaurants and modern leisure facilities. Operators of bowling alleys, trampoline halls, indoor sports parks or multiplayer entertainment centres often believe that by integrating a restaurant they meet the requirements for the installation of gaming machines pursuant to § 33c GewO. However, the Administrative Court of Berlin (VG Berlin) sets clear boundaries here: leisure and sports facilities remain unsuitable locations for installation – even when a separate gastronomic area with its own licence exists.

The judgment of the VG Berlin of 11.11.2025 – 4 K 28/25 – once again clarifies the strict, youth-protection-oriented line of the case law. For operators and proprietors, it is an important signal: The focus of the business determines the decision – not the existence of a counter.

The case: Dispute over the installation of gaming machines in a Berlin bowling facility

In the underlying case, a gaming machine operator wanted to continue operating two gaming machines in the gastronomic area of a large Berlin bowling facility. The business premises comprised 28 bowling lanes, pool tables, dart machines and further entertainment machines – a classic bowling and leisure centre with an attached restaurant. Gaming machines had already been installed there in 2001; however, the new operator requested an up-to-date suitability confirmation pursuant to § 33c GewO.

The competent district office refused the application. The reason given: The business was a leisure and sports facility and therefore not a permissible location for installation under the Gaming Regulations (SpielV). The claimant argued in response: The restaurant prevails economically and in terms of floor area, there was factual protection of existing use, and the current youth protection measures (including OASIS query, video surveillance, trained staff) spoke in favour of a licence.

Legal considerations of the VG: Why the bowling alley is not a restaurant within the meaning of the SpielV

The VG Berlin confirms the refusal to allow the installation of gaming machines with detailed and differentiated reasoning.

Predominance of leisure use – 'Bowling alley' as the defining type of business

In the court's view, the character of a leisure and sports facility clearly predominates. It refers in particular to:

• the restaurant licence, which explicitly lists the type of business as 'bowling alley',
• the website, which prominently highlights the sports and entertainment business,
• the clear visual predominance of the bowling lanes compared to the gastronomic area.

Thus this was not a bar or restaurant in which gaming machines could merely be installed on an ancillary basis, but a bowling business whose restaurant was ancillary in nature is. However, for the Spielverordnung the focal point of the mode of operation is decisive.

The "sports hall" factual scenario: to be interpreted broadly – also for leisure bowling

Particularly important: the court classifies the bowling facility as a sports hall within the meaning of § 1 Abs. 2 Nr. 3 SpielV. This provision contains an explicit installation prohibition.

The reasoning:

• "Sports hall" encompasses all facilities that serve sporting activities – including leisure bowling.
• Even non-competitive operation is sport within the meaning of the SpielV.
• Additional offerings such as billiards or gaming machines reinforce the sporting and entertainment character.

Thus the statutory installation prohibition applies directly.

Youth protection as the underlying protective purpose – possibility of access is sufficient

A central element of the decision is youth protection, the core purpose of the Spielverordnung. The court emphasizes:

• Children and young persons regularly have free access to bowling lanes.
• The internet presence of the centre is expressly directed at children's birthday parties and school classes.
• Even the possibility of access by young persons is sufficient to prohibit the installation.

Modern protective measures such as OASIS, video surveillance or prevention materials change nothing – the local unsuitability remains.

No grandfather clause: every suitability confirmation is person-specific

The claimant relied on a suitability confirmation from 2001 that has remained unchallenged to this day suitability confirmation from 2001. The court, however, makes clear:

• The suitability confirmation is not an object-related permit.
• It is person-bound – each new operator requires their own confirmation.
• Previously issued decisions do not have any legally binding effect.

Even a decades-long operation of the equipment thus does not protect against the applicable legal position.

Result: The installation location is inadmissible – claim dismissed

The VG Berlin dismisses the claim in full. The installation location is for the installation of gaming machines not suitable, because:

• no genuine catering or drinks business exists,
• the premises are a sports hall within the meaning of the SpielV,
• youth protection is severely affected,
• no legitimate expectations protection position exists.

Practical implications: Clear warning to operators of leisure and sports facilities

The ruling fits seamlessly into the restrictive line of case law and has substantial significance for the entire sector.

Key consequences:

• Bowling centres, trampoline halls, billiard halls, indoor arenas and comparable leisure venues are almost always unsuitable sites for installation.
• A small catering area is insufficient to reclassify the operation as a drinks business.
• Even a professional youth protection concept does not eliminate the location-based prohibition.
• Existing establishments are not protected – each change of operator requires a fresh review.

For authorities, the ruling provides confirmation to consistently reject applications for the installation of gaming machines in leisure and sports facilities.

Recommendation for operators and machine providers: Seek legal advice early

Anyone wishing to operate devices in leisure or sports facilities or who is already doing so should act now. The requirements of the Trade Regulation (Gewerbeordnung) and the Gaming Regulation (Spielverordnung) are interpreted strictly by the courts. Incorrect location decisions for the installation of gaming machines lead to:

• worthless investments,
• substantial loss of revenue,
• possible administrative measures up to and including operating prohibition.

AVANTCORE Rechtsanwälte in Stuttgart specialises in administrative permit procedures. We review for you:

• the permissibility of your location,
• the prospects of success for objection or judicial proceedings,
• design options for legally compliant operation,
• strategies to minimise risks and conflicts with the authorities.

Contact us – we advise you comprehensively, quickly and with legal certainty.

We have already reported several times on decisions in gaming law:

Gaming law permit for stationary betting intermediaries

Gaming hall law: No tolerance for gaming halls – the requirements are strict