Lithuanian Gaming Authority inspects UAB Tete-a-tete casino

(PRESS RELEASE) -- The Gambling Supervisory Authority under the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Lithuania (hereinafter referred to as the Supervisory Authority) having conducted a scheduled inspection of UAB "Tete-a-tete" casino (hereinafter referred to as the Company), by order No. DIE-22 of the Director of the Supervisory Authority dated 29 January 2026 "On the scheduled inspection of UAB "Tete-a-tete" casino in accordance with the inspection order No. PT-9 dated 29 January 2025" stated that:

1. When the Company's employees admitted a person to the Company's slot machine parlor and allowed him to be in the slot machine parlor without asking him to provide an identity document, but by verifying his identity based on the data already available in the Company's data control and management system (copy of passport), the Company did not violate the requirements of Article 10, Part 10 and Article 20, Part 1 of the Law on Gambling of the Republic of Lithuania (hereinafter referred to as the LLG).

After the Company submitted an extract from the database used by the Company, it was determined that the passport copy of the customer who entered the Company's vending machine showroom without the Company's employee asking him to provide an identity document was previously stored in the Company's database, therefore the Company's employee was able to verify the identity of the person entering the vending machine showroom without physically asking him to provide an identity document, but using the data already available in the Company's data control and management system.

2. The company did not violate Article 11(2) of the ALI by renting the premises of a slot machine parlor from a company that did not meet the requirement of impeccable reputation set out in Article 11(2) of the ALI.

It was established that the Company concluded a contract for the lease of premises with the company on 28 July 2005. The Law of the Republic of Lithuania on Gambling No. IX-325 of 18 April 2024 on Amending Articles 2, 6, 71, 72, 73, 11, 22, 292 and Supplementing the Law with Article 74, which supplemented the Law on Gambling with provisions establishing the requirements for impeccable reputation for persons whom the gambling organizer uses to carry out gambling activities specified in the gambling activity permit, entered into force on 1 November 2024 (hereinafter referred to as the Amending Law). Part 4 of Article 10 of the Amending Law, regulating the procedure for the entry into force, implementation and application of this Law, obliged gambling organizers, including the Company, no later than 1 May 2025. The Supervisory Authority shall provide data on persons used to carry out the gambling activities specified in the gambling activity permit to the Supervisory Authority, and the Supervisory Authority, upon receipt of the aforementioned information, shall be obliged by Article 10, Part 4 of the Amending Law to perform the actions specified in Article 74, Part 10 of the AL Law, i.e. to apply to the competent authorities for obtaining conclusions and information about the persons specified in Article 6, Part 1, Point 32 of the AL Law. In the case under consideration, the Company fulfilled its obligation set out in Article 10, Part 4 of the Amending Law by providing the Supervisory Authority with information about the persons specified in Article 6, Part 1, Point 32 of the AL Law. In addition, Article 10, Part 5 of the Amending Law provides for the possibility of applying a sanction to gambling organizers at the stage of implementation of the law only for failure to provide the aforementioned data or for not providing all the data, therefore it was stated that the Company from 2025. April 17 to 2025. On August 11, 2005, by renting the premises of a slot machine parlor from a company that did not meet the requirement of impeccable reputation, with which the lease agreement was concluded on July 28, 2005, the company did not violate the requirement of Article 11, Part 2, of the ALI.

Decisions made by the Supervisory Authority are not final and may be appealed in accordance with the procedure established by the Law on Administrative Procedure of the Republic of Lithuania.

Possible violations are examined and proposals for a decision on the imposition of a fine and its amount are submitted by the Advisory Commission for the adoption of a decision on the imposition of a fine and its amount, established by order of the Director of the Gambling Supervision Service.