EA faces Israeli class action over alleged gambling in FIFA loot boxes
A plaintiff who says he purchased virtual tokens in FIFA 23 claims that randomized in-game packs amount to prohibited gambling and may encourage addictive behavior. An Israeli court rejected EA’s attempt to argue that the country’s courts lack jurisdiction to hear the case.
The Tel Aviv District Court on Monday rejected a request by EA Swiss Sàrl, the non-U.S. arm of gaming giant Electronic Arts, to dismiss a motion to certify a class action against it on the grounds that Israeli courts lack jurisdiction. The case centers on allegations that the company sells “loot boxes” in its games, which the plaintiff claims constitute a form of prohibited gambling.
The motion to certify the class action was filed in March 2025. The plaintiff, represented by attorneys Lior Lahav and Hadar Stempo, said he plays the company’s games in Israel and purchased virtual tokens in FIFA 23. He alleges that the company facilitates and encourages the purchase of tokens used to acquire “loot boxes,” or randomized packs that yield digital in-game items when opened.
According to the plaintiff, the system constitutes gambling based purely on chance. He claims that the company is effectively operating an illegal gambling platform disguised as a sports game aimed at a young audience.
The plaintiff further alleges that the company sells loot boxes for real money without disclosing their contents or the odds of receiving particular items in advance. He claims that the company concealed the games’ alleged gambling component from players, as well as their potential to be addictive. The application included an expert opinion by Dr. Liraz Margalit addressing the potential for loot boxes to lead to addictive behavior.
EA rejected the allegations and asked the court to rule that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the case, arguing, among other things, that the plaintiff had no valid cause of action. The company contended that if its games qualify as prohibited gambling under Israeli law, the plaintiff and the class members he seeks to represent would also have violated the law. It argued that the plaintiff should not be allowed to compel other class members to become lawbreakers.
On the substance of the allegations, EA argued that the presence of an element of chance does not automatically make a game illegal gambling. Under its interpretation of the law, a game may involve chance while still being based primarily on skill or understanding.
After reviewing the arguments, Judge Tamar Snunit-Forrer rejected the company’s motion. In her ruling, she wrote that “without making a definitive determination, the factual and evidentiary basis presented by the applicant establishes a potential legal cause of action against the respondent.”
The judge also accepted the plaintiff’s arguments that the requirements for serving court documents on the company had been met and that Israel was the appropriate forum to hear the case. She ordered EA to pay the plaintiff NIS 10,000 in legal costs.
The ruling does not determine whether loot boxes constitute illegal gambling or whether the class action will ultimately be certified. It allows the case to proceed past EA’s jurisdictional challenge.
