Compliance Radar

Who was sanctioned, and for what?

Fines, court rulings and incidents from Europe and North America: 718 cases from 32 jurisdictions, each with an official source and checked against that source before publication. Filter by country, area of law and sector. Click a chart to drill down one level.

4cases from 3 jurisdictions
€1.2mTotal of monetary amounts
€349,895Largest single case: Hillbeck Homes (Sowerby Bridge) Ltd
€290,000Median per case with an amount

Click a bar to drill down one level.

When?

per quarter, by date of decision
Trend
PeriodCasesTotal
Q3 20230—
Q4 20231€272,982
Q1 20240—
Q2 20240—
Q3 20240—
Q4 20241€268,784
Q1 20250—
Q2 20250—
Q3 20250—
Q4 20250—
Q1 20260—
Q2 20260—
Q3 20262€656,912

4 cases

16 Sep 2026 Hillbeck Homes (Sowerby Bridge) LtdDeveloper pays £300,000 after agency worker falls through unprotected stairwell opening United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €349,895

A 24-year-old labourer working as a temporary worker for a scaffolding company fell, in his second week of work on the developer's housing site, through a stairwell opening that was neither securely covered nor guarded, dropping one storey onto concrete and suffering serious spinal injuries. The court found the company guilty on three counts because it had neither adequately planned nor supervised work at height and had not taken suitable measures to prevent falls. Fine of £300,000 plus costs.

What organisations can take from it

Floor openings on construction sites must be covered with load-bearing covers or guarded at all times – new and temporary workers in particular do not know where the hazards are.

Relevance to training and awareness

Fall protection at openings; induction of new workers

Authority / court
Leeds Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Health and Safety Executive)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Work at Height Regulations 2005
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Published
21 Sep 2026

Original amount 300,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Sep 2026.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text — no contact details and no IP address.

23 Jul 2026 Orchids Builders LLCFlorida roofer: $349,754 for repeatedly missing fall protection USAWorkplace safety and accidents €307,017

On 21.01. and 10 March 2026, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) found at two residential construction sites in Rockledge that employees of the roofing contractor were working on roofs without fall protection; training records, eye protection when using nail guns and ladders extending sufficiently above the roof edge were also missing. The company had been inspected seven times since 2023, each time with fall protection violations. Proposed: $349,754 (2 wilful, 4 repeat violations).

What organisations can take from it

Companies that allow the same fall hazards to recur after earlier inspections risk classification as a repeat or wilful violation with substantially higher penalties.

Relevance to training and awareness

Fall protection during roofing work

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
U.S. Department of Labor – Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
29 CFR 1926 Subpart M (Fall Protection), Subpart X (Ladders)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Culpability
intentional
Repeat case
yes
Published
23 Jul 2026

Original amount 349,754 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 Jul 2026.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text — no contact details and no IP address.

6 Nov 2024 595 Construction LLCIllinois framing contractor: $287,465 for repeatedly unprotected work at height USAWorkplace safety and accidents €268,784

In May 2024, inspectors saw carpenters of the Crystal Lake company working on residential buildings in Elburn at heights of over 6 feet without fall protection three times within one month; training records and forklift certifications were also missing, and rigging equipment was damaged. The company had already been cited in 2022 and 2023. Proposed: $287,465.

What organisations can take from it

Training records are mandatory, but only daily checks on site prevent falls.

Relevance to training and awareness

Fall protection and hazard recognition on construction sites

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
U.S. Department of Labor – Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
29 CFR 1926 Subpart M (Fall Protection) u. a.
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Culpability
intentional
Repeat case
yes
Published
6 Nov 2024

Original amount 287,465 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 6 Nov 2024.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text — no contact details and no IP address.

15 Dec 2023 iSpan Systems LP; East Elgin Concrete Forming Ltd.Building collapse in London (Ontario): steel fabricator and concrete firm pay CA$400,000 Canada, ONWorkplace safety and accidents €272,982

In December 2020, part of a new building collapsed while concrete was being poured on the roof level; two workers died and four were seriously injured. The manufacturer of the structural steel system had not ensured its load-bearing capacity, and the concrete firm had not adequately instructed its workers on correct measuring procedures. Fines of CA$260,000 (iSpan) and CA$140,000 (East Elgin).

What organisations can take from it

In subcontracting chains, the structural system manufacturer and the supervising contractor each remain responsible in their own right – passing on the work does not relieve them.

Relevance to training and awareness

Instruction on concrete pouring specifications and load limits

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Ontario Court of Justice London (Ermittlung: Ontario Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Section 25(1)(e)(iii) (iSpan) und Section 25(2)(a) (East Elgin) Occupational Health and Safety Act (Ontario)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Construction and real estate
Mitigating circumstances
Guilty pleas by both companies.
Published
5 Jan 2024

Original amount 400,000 CAD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Dec 2023.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text — no contact details and no IP address.

Ready for training that sticks?

Try it free for 14 days — from 1 user, no credit card, ends automatically.

Start free trial