Norsk Tipping Lotteries Sued by 15,000 Customers Over Jackpot Scandals

Norway is one of the last European countries to hold a state owned monopoly on gambling, and news like this just puts more pressure on the gambling authority to consider the alternative. It is not an isolated case either, the ongoing lawsuit against Norsk Tipping, the state’s official lottery provider, is now backed by 15,000 angry customers. And why are they up in arms? Because Norsk Tipping has drawn the wrong lottery winners for 10 years now.

The case against the Norwegian Lottery Authority is growing, and it is more than a one-off error. Instead, this is a fundamental error in the product provided – as thousands of lottery players have received wrongful notifications that they have hit the jackpot. Only later, to discover that the notification was wrong, and that they didn’t win anything. It is more than enough to incense any lottery player, and something that now the courts have to assess amid the mounting pressure.

What Is Wrong with Norsk Tipping

The class action lawsuit that Norsk Tipping faces is that its lottery software is flawed, and what makes this even more concerning is that the same system has been used for over a decade. Imagine receiving a notification stating that you have won a jackpot level prize – a split second that feels like it could completely change your life. But then you find out that that is not the case. No, it was just a systematic error, and your lottery ticket didn’t win. You weren’t the only one who received this notification either, thousands of other players got the same message, only to discover it was a system error.

This is not just an embarrassing turn of events for the lottery provider, Norsk Tipping. Because lotteries, like casinos and sportsbooks, need to build trust with their client base. These errors ruin the lottery’s credibility, as they don’t know whether any messages they receive are real, or if they are caused by a flawed internal process, poor oversight, or a fundamental software bug. It can also cause emotional harm to some, harm that can be taken to the courts and used as a basis for a court case.

Systematic Flaws and Technical Errors

A report by the auditing firm PwC Norway, who are not actually an iGaming-oriented firm – so they don’t do RNG testing or game software analysis – but makes legal audits on products, determined that there was a serious oversight on behalf of Norsk Tipping. They reviewed the internal processes, conducting interviews, setting up workshops and analyses to gain a thorough report of how the lottery worked. They analyzed the biggest lottery products offered in Norway, including the VikingLotto, Eurojackpot, and Lotto.

They found that there were:

• Errors in the presented winning chances for additional prizes in Eurojackpot
• Incorrect prize notifications in the Super Draw
• “Missing” participants in the Super Draw
• Insufficient follow ups of the software suppliers

It stated that the Norwegian Lottery Authority had spent too much time focusing on making new products, game speed, and innovation, which resulted in a drop off in quality and control of their existing products. The auditing firm KPMG determined that while there were processes for ensuring the quality of the lottery products, these were gradually diluted and weakened, as priorities changed and personnel shifted.

Instead, Norsk Tipping put more emphasis on new partnerships, extending casino games portfolios, and developing new products:

• Partnership with EveryMatrix for premium online casino games
• Expanded collab with Playtech – for more titles across Playtech in-house studios (Origins, Quickspin, Ash, etc)
• New Instant Flax titles (digital scratchcard games) with Pollard Banknote

While the provider expanded on its offering, the control over its most popular product, the Norwegian lotteries, gradually declined. This led to more errors, poorer quality draws, and also “missing participants” in the case of the Super Draw.

Ongoing Lawsuit Against the Lottery

The lawsuits have been around since last year, and in September, the Norwegian Lottery Authority approved a fine of NOK 46 million against the lottery provider ($4.9 million). For the operator, that represents around 0.5% of their annual turnover. But in December of last year, a class action lawsuit was filed by just over 5,400 players. This number has now reached 15,000, showing just how widespread the technical errors were.

No official amount has been disclosed as to how much they are suing for, but there are plenty of historical precedents to give Norsk Tipping an idea. In 2025, there was a separate civil case, suing the June Eurojackpot for sending 30,000 players false notifications. The lottery provider was fined NOK 10 million. And before that, there were cases against the provider for self exclusion system failures and wrongful payouts.

This ongoing lawsuit is a civil action for damages, so while the operator will most likely get fined, if the suit is successful, Norsk Tipping will have to pay compensation to the players as well as penalties paid to the state.

Conflict of Interest in the Courts

Those penalties will be paid to the state, who own and runs Norsk Tipping, and who also sit in the courts and deliberate on the case. This conflict of interest is not lost on critics of the system, as it raises many questions. Whether the state can objectively judge the case and give out fair penalties – and if they are, then won’t those paid penalties still go back into the same system or not. This is set to be one of the biggest civil class action lawsuits in Norway’s history, and so it has garnered huge media attention.

The case has been backed by the Norsk Bransjeforening for Onlinespill, or NBO, a third party that represents the interests of private gaming operators. They know that this contentious lawsuit can put pressure on the Norwegian gambling authority and help to back the argument for ending the monopoly. Norsk Tipping’s Chief Legal Officer, Merete Haug Jørstad, stated that the company will be represented by the law firm Thommessen in the courts. She also raised attention to the interest from NBO and foreign gambling operators, saying that Norsk Tipping is fully aware of the tactics used by these parties to attack the monopoly model in Norway.

Testing Norway’s Gambling Monopoly

She went on to say that this is the sixth lawsuit “sponsored” by foreign gambling operators since 2019. They are keen to tie the lawsuit to the foreign operators vs state monopoly battle, even going as far as to question whether the lawsuit has the welfare of Norsk Tipping’s customers in mind. 15,000 angry customers, and potentially more, would argue otherwise.

It is pretty hot territory right now, because all of Norway’s neighbors have now either ended their gambling monopolies or are in the process of doing so. Denmark and Sweden ended their gambling monopolies back in 2012 and 2019, respectively. Since doing so, they have gambling authorities that can issue iGaming licenses to private operators, but the authorities still define what games are allowed and how the operators can offer them to players.

Finland’s Veikkas Monopoly Comparisons

Finland, which has a gambling monopoly run by Veikkaus, is in the process of dismantling its model. By mid 2027, Finland will open its doors to private operators. Veikkaus will still run, and the company has already branched out by opening Fennica Gaming (a software provider), partnering with new game suppliers, and obtaining licenses abroad, like in the UAE and Quebec.

Ending the monopoly is not strictly speaking the end of Norsk Tipping, not going on how Veikkaus is preparing for it in Finland. But Norway has not displayed any signs or serious movements towards deconstructing its monopoly.

This lawsuit probably won’t dent the Norwegian state’s resolve to hold onto the monopoly, but it is just another little test that holds to the argument. But in the meantime, the main focus is on what happens to the lottery products, and whether the players can get compensated for the errors that have plagued Norsk Tipping for the past 10+ years.