Who was sanctioned, and for what?

The provider of web-based systems for sickness reporting, rehabilitation and occupational safety incidents was hacked in August 2025; the stolen personal data appeared on the dark web shortly afterwards. The Swedish data protection authority (Integritetsskyddsmyndigheten, IMY) found that, despite the high need for protection, there were no adequate security measures and no automatic real-time monitoring for attacks, assessed this as negligent and imposed 1,800,000 SEK.

Authority / court

Integritetsskyddsmyndigheten (IMY)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Art. 32 Abs. 1 DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Culpability

negligent

Published

22 Sep 2026

Original amount 1,800,000 SEK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Sep 2026.

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

According to the sanctions disclosure of the Financial Supervisory Service (FSS, Korea's financial supervisor), the online lending platform PFC Technologies transferred the resident registration numbers of 8,497 customers to a third party without their consent on 28 September 2022 in order to calculate the error rate of a new service for mortgage customers, and received credit information on the same customers from that third party, likewise without consent (such as the address and official value of their properties); in addition, when the inspection began it had not implemented password rules against easily guessed numbers. The sanction of 17 September 2026 comprises an institutional warning, an administrative fine (과태료) of KRW 24 million and a penalty surcharge (과징금) of KRW 49 million, KRW 73 million in total.

Authority / court

Financial Supervisory Service (FSS)

Area of law

Data protection

Legal basis

Art. 19, 32 und 34 Credit Information Use and Protection Act; Art. 16, 28 und 29 Durchführungsverordnung

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

17 Sep 2026

Original amount 73,000,000 KRW, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 Sep 2026.

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

For seven months (October 2025 to May 2026), the bank continued to send a customer advertising via its app, although he had objected several times. The Italian data protection authority (Garante per la protezione dei dati personali) also found deficient systems for implementing objections and inaccurate information about the processing, and imposed 5,508,000 EUR (Provvedimento No. 613).

Authority / court

Garante per la protezione dei dati personali

Area of law

Data protection · Marketing and consent

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. a, Art. 12, 21, 24 DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

11 Sep 2026

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

Hospital staff opened a colleague's electronic health record to organise duty rosters during Covid rather than for treatment purposes. Technical barriers limiting access to treating staff were lacking; the Italian data protection authority (Garante per la protezione dei dati personali) imposed 24,000 EUR (Provvedimento No. 616).

Authority / court

Garante per la protezione dei dati personali

Area of law

Data protection · Employee data

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. a, b, c, f, Art. 9, 25, 32 DSGVO; Art. 75 Codice privacy; Linee guida dossier sanitario

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Healthcare

Published

11 Sep 2026

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

Since 2007, the municipal sports facilities operator had had cameras in the changing rooms of a swimming pool that recorded the locker area. The Italian data protection authority (Garante per la protezione dei dati personali) found no sound legal basis, incomplete notices and a 72-hour retention period not justified by a necessity assessment, and imposed 8,000 EUR (Provvedimento No. 619); the cameras were removed during the proceedings.

Authority / court

Garante per la protezione dei dati personali

Area of law

Data protection · Video surveillance

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. a, Art. 6 Abs. 1 lit. c und e DSGVO; Art. 2-ter Codice privacy

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Public sector

Published

11 Sep 2026

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

Using credentials stolen elsewhere, attackers logged in en masse on the websites of GS SHOP (June 2024 to February 2025) and GS25 (December 2024 to January 2025) and obtained data on 1,581,025 and 79,128 people respectively; GS Retail Co., Ltd. detected neither the bursts of login attempts from the same IP addresses nor the rising number of failed attempts, and after the first discovery at GS25 did not stop the parallel attack on GS SHOP. The authority also found an inadequate data protection organisation and that 1,599 further people were notified more than 72 hours late, imposed a penalty surcharge of 12,836,000,000 KRW and an administrative fine of 3,000,000 KRW (12,839,000,000 KRW in total) and ordered detection measures and a review of the data protection organisation.

Authority / court

Personal Information Protection Commission (PIPC, 개인정보보호위원회)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Personal Information Protection Act (개인정보 보호법) Art. 29, Art. 34(1); Sanktion nach Art. 64-2(1) Nr. 9

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Culpability

negligent

Mitigating circumstances

Reduction of 30% because no benefit was derived and 40% for cooperation, remediation and protective efforts (ISMS-P certification, self-regulation, privacy impact assessment); increase of 50% because the infringement lasted more than two years.

Liability of senior managers

The company was ordered to deploy dedicated data protection staff and to define the powers and responsibility of its chief privacy officer (CPO) clearly.

Published

31 Aug 2026

Original amount 12,839,000,000 KRW, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 Aug 2026.

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

In 2023, intruders gained access to two former psychiatric hospitals and posted videos of the patient records stored there online. An inspection of twelve sites found records with mould, water and animal damage in unsuitable rooms, up to and including shipping containers. Ireland's Data Protection Commission (DPC) imposed a fine of 645,000 EUR, issued a reprimand and ordered audits and the relocation of records.

Authority / court

Data Protection Commission (DPC)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

DSGVO Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. e und f, 32 Abs. 1, 33 Abs. 1, 34 Abs. 1

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Public sector

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

2 Sep 2026

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

The Agência Nacional de Proteção de Dados (ANPD, Brazilian data protection authority) imposed three fines totalling 153,769,671.33 BRL on ByteDance Brasil Tecnologia Ltda., which operates TikTok in Brazil (63,176,686.67 BRL each for breaches of Art. 7 and Art. 6 VIII LGPD, and 27,416,297.99 BRL for Art. 6 X LGPD). According to the decision, data of children and adolescents were processed without a valid legal basis both in the feed available without registration and when accounts were created, and effective preventive and accountability measures were lacking. The authority also ordered the deletion of data of registered adolescents aged 13 to 18 whose legal representation is not regularised within 60 working days, backed by a daily penalty of 137,081.49 BRL for each day of delay.

Authority / court

Agência Nacional de Proteção de Dados (ANPD), Superintendência de Fiscalização

Area of law

Data protection

Legal basis

Art. 6 VIII, Art. 6 X und Art. 7 LGPD (Lei nº 13.709/2018); Sanktionen nach Art. 52 LGPD; Resolução CD/ANPD nº 4/2023 (Regulamento de Dosimetria)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Media and online platforms

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

25 Aug 2026

Original amount 153,769,671.33 BRL, converted at the ECB reference rate of 24 Aug 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Attackers obtained the credentials of a user account with administrator rights through phishing and accessed customer data. The Romanian data protection authority (ANSPDCP) criticised the lack of technical and organisational measures and of regular effectiveness testing, imposed 15,728 lei (3,000 EUR) and ordered regular employee training, including on recognising phishing e-mails. Date = publication of the press release; according to the authority, the investigation was concluded in the previous month.

Authority / court

Autoritatea Națională de Supraveghere a Prelucrării Datelor cu Caracter Personal (ANSPDCP)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Art. 32 Abs. 1 lit. b und Abs. 2 DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Other

Published

19 Aug 2026

Original amount 15,728 RON, converted at the ECB reference rate of 19 Aug 2026.

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

Through a software vulnerability in a mail platform developed by KDDI and provided to several internet service providers, unauthorised parties obtained the credentials (email address and password) of 12,231,954 people; 7,616,173 passwords were stored in plain text, so mailboxes could be read (discovered on 17 June 2026). The authority gave KDDI guidance (shidō) under Art. 147 APPI to improve its technical security measures because access controls against attackers spreading through the system had been inadequate, required a report by 19 October 2026 and also gave such guidance to individual providers responsible for the plain-text storage.

Authority / court

Personal Information Protection Commission (PPC, 個人情報保護委員会)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Act on the Protection of Personal Information (APPI, 個人情報の保護に関する法律) Art. 147, Art. 146 Abs. 1

Action

Reprimand or warning

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

19 Aug 2026

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Datatilsynet (Norwegian Data Protection Authority) fined the online dietary supplement retailer Lab Pharma AS NOK 205,000 for breaching its duty to cooperate with the supervisory authority (Art. 31 GDPR): the company had threatened case handlers with police reports and lawsuits in order to end the investigation of a complaint, and submitted requested documents late. The authority also ordered the company to delete the name and images of a former advertising partner (an influencer) from all its websites and to stop using her data for marketing until it can demonstrate a legal basis, as the underlying contract had already expired in March 2017.

Authority / court

Datatilsynet

Area of law

Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency

Legal basis

Art. 31, Art. 58 Abs. 2 lit. f, g und i, Art. 83 DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Culpability

intentional

Liability of senior managers

Datatilsynet attributed the intentional conduct of the company's management to the company.

Published

17 Aug 2026

Original amount 205,000 NOK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 12 Aug 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The UK Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) issued a reprimand to ACRO Criminal Records Office. According to the ICO, it followed a cyber incident that may have affected the personal data of around 10,000 people in the UK. The ICO found infringements of the duty to implement appropriate technical and organisational security measures under Article 32 UK GDPR. No fine was imposed.

Authority / court

Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Art. 32(1), 32(1)(b) und 32(1)(d) UK GDPR; Verwarnung nach Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR

Action

Reprimand or warning

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Public sector

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

The ICO fined Elderly Aids Limited, a seller of call-blocking devices, £190,000 and also issued an enforcement notice. The ICO found that the company had made 758,053 unsolicited direct marketing calls to numbers registered with the TPS/CTPS whose subscribers had not agreed to such calls, leading to 20 complaints. The legal basis is regulations 21 and 24 of PECR. Under the notice, payment by 7 September 2026 reduces the amount by 20% to £152,000.

Authority / court

Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)

Area of law

Data protection · Marketing and consent

Legal basis

Regulations 21 und 24 PECR; section 55A DPA 1998 (Geldbuße), section 40 DPA 1998 (Anordnung)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Original amount 190,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 6 Aug 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

Following several complaints, the Autoritatea Națională de Supraveghere a Prelucrării Datelor cu Caracter Personal (Romanian data protection authority, ANSPDCP) found that current and former employees, untrained and without procedural rules, had access to extensive data (including health, family and income data), that data subjects were not informed under Art. 14 GDPR, that excessive data were collected and that automated advertising calls were made without consent. Fines: 78,465 lei (15,000 EUR, Art. 32(4)), 52,310 lei (10,000 EUR, Art. 14), 104,620 lei (20,000 EUR, Art. 5/9 GDPR) and 50,000 lei (Law 506/2004); in addition, an order to provide regular employee training. Date = publication of the press release; according to the authority, the investigation was concluded in June 2026.

Authority / court

Autoritatea Națională de Supraveghere a Prelucrării Datelor cu Caracter Personal (ANSPDCP)

Area of law

Data protection · Marketing and consent

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. c i. V. m. Art. 9, Art. 14, Art. 32 Abs. 4 DSGVO; Art. 12 Abs. 1 Gesetz 506/2004

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Other

Published

6 Aug 2026

Original amount 285,395 RON, converted at the ECB reference rate of 6 Aug 2026.

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

Attackers copied certificates from lost femtocells of KT Corporation into home-made devices, stayed connected to the mobile network undetected for around eleven months, intercepted data on 16,647 subscribers (phone number, IMSI, IMEI) and used intercepted confirmation codes to trigger unauthorised mobile payments of around 240 million KRW affecting 368 people. For inadequate access control – certificates valid for ten years, no IP restriction, no detection of unknown cell IDs – the authority imposed a penalty surcharge of 53,979,000,000 KRW and ordered vulnerability checks and a stronger role for the chief privacy officer.

Authority / court

Personal Information Protection Commission (PIPC, 개인정보보호위원회)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Personal Information Protection Act (개인정보 보호법) Art. 29, Sanktion nach Art. 64-2(1) Nr. 9; gesonderter Beschluss 제2026-015-094호: Art. 63(1)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Culpability

negligent

Mitigating circumstances

Reduction of 30% because no benefit was derived and a further 50% for cooperation, remediation, compensation of those affected and protective efforts; increase of 50% because the infringement lasted more than two years.

Liability of senior managers

The company was ordered to define the responsibility and role of its chief privacy officer (CPO) for the whole company clearly and to revise its governance.

Published

30 Jul 2026

Original amount 53,979,000,000 KRW, converted at the ECB reference rate of 29 Jul 2026.

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

A large-scale breach affected EETAA information systems used to implement programmes of the Ministry of Social Cohesion and Family; identification, contact, financial and health data of a large number of people were affected. The Archi Prostasias Dedomenon (Hellenic Data Protection Authority) attributed the success of the attack to outdated systems and inadequate security measures and criticised the absence of a data processing agreement. In Decision 15/2026 it imposed a total of EUR 350,000 (ministry EUR 150,000 under Art. 5(1)(f)/Art. 32 and EUR 50,000 under Art. 28(3) GDPR; EETAA EUR 100,000 under Art. 32 and EUR 50,000 under Art. 28(3) GDPR) and ordered the agreement to be concluded and the planned security measures implemented within one month.

Authority / court

Αρχή Προστασίας Δεδομένων Προσωπικού Χαρακτήρα (Hellenic Data Protection Authority)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. f, Art. 28 Abs. 3, Art. 32 Abs. 1, Art. 58 Abs. 2 lit. d und i DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Public sector

Mitigating circumstances

According to the authority, the ministry met its breach notification and communication obligations.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The Metropolitan Police handed a defendant unredacted documents containing the new address and telephone number of a stalking victim, and in a circular e-mail disclosed 18 people with a parliamentary connection in an open recipient list. The UK Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) ordered improvements within 3 and 12 months, including in data protection training completion rates.

Authority / court

Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Data Protection Act 2018, Section 40

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Public sector

Employees

10,000 or more

Culpability

negligent

Published

5 Aug 2026

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

The Bundesnetzagentur (Federal Network Agency) imposed fines totalling 34,327 EUR on a call centre that mainly marketed telecoms products: 32,000 EUR for unlawful telephone advertising and 2,327 EUR because consents to sales calls had not been fully documented. The campaign continued despite the gaps and requests to stop calling were sometimes ignored; the company has appealed.

Authority / court

Bundesnetzagentur (BNetzA)

Area of law

Data protection · Marketing and consent

Legal basis

UWG – Verbot unerlaubter Telefonwerbung gegenüber Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern; § 7a UWG (Dokumentation und Aufbewahrung von Einwilligungen)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Other

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The Garante (Italian data protection authority) fined TIM 9,516,000 EUR because call centres outside the official sales network made promotional calls on the company's behalf using numbers not recorded in the operators' register ROC or falsified numbers (spoofing), often to lines entered in the do-not-call register, and the contacts obtained in this way reached its systems as apparently lawful leads via fictitious call-back requests on sales partners' web forms. The authority found that TIM had selected and supervised its sales partners inadequately and had systematically failed to answer, or answered late, requests for access, erasure and objection. In addition, TIM must secure its lead process, strengthen oversight of the sales chain and adapt its procedures for data subject rights.

Authority / court

Garante per la protezione dei dati personali

Area of law

Data protection · Marketing and consent

Legal basis

Art. 5, 6, 7, 12, 15–22, 24, 25, 28 und 32 DSGVO; Art. 130 Codice in materia di protezione dei dati personali (D.Lgs. 196/2003)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Employees

10,000 or more

Culpability

negligent

Repeat case

yes

Mitigating circumstances

Taken into account as mitigating: short period and limited number of data subjects, measures taken during the proceedings (including checks on and termination of contracts with partners), a high level of cooperation, no special categories of personal data, adherence to the telemarketing code of conduct and substantial investment in controlling the sales chain.

Published

31 Jul 2026

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

In summer 2025, an attacker gained access to the private hospital's electronic patient record system and obtained data on 524,867 patients and 202,246 trusted persons. There was no VPN or multi-factor authentication for external users, no appropriate access control and no detection of suspicious activity; the trusted persons were not notified. France's data protection authority (Commission nationale de l'informatique et des libertés, CNIL) imposed a fine of 500,000 EUR (SAN-2026-009).

Authority / court

Commission nationale de l'informatique et des libertés (CNIL)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

DSGVO Art. 32, Art. 34

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Healthcare

Published

3 Sep 2026

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

The CNIL (French data protection authority) fined the IT and engineering consultancy EXTIA EUR 300,000 because, of 265 erasure requests received in 2024 – mostly from job applicants, occasionally from former employees – 12 were not processed at all and 166 applicants were not told of the outcome; 27 received their reply only after the one-month deadline. The CNIL regarded this as particularly negligent, especially as the company had already been reminded of its obligations by the CNIL twice in 2024 (Art. 12 and 17 GDPR).

Authority / court

Commission nationale de l'informatique et des libertés (CNIL), formation restreinte

Area of law

Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency

Legal basis

Art. 12 und 17 DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Employees

1,000 to 9,999

Culpability

negligent

Repeat case

yes

Mitigating circumstances

During the proceedings the company deleted the data concerned and informed the applicants retrospectively.

Published

9 Sep 2026

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

A synchronisation error between two applications allowed a customer to retrieve other customers’ invoices in the mobile app; in addition, the ticketing platform, which was publicly accessible without VPN, MFA or IP restriction, was attacked and a very large data set (including copies of identity documents, card data, IBANs) was exfiltrated. The Romanian data protection authority (ANSPDCP) imposed fines of 104,780 lei (20,000 EUR, Art. 25) and 419,120 lei (80,000 EUR, Art. 32), a total of 523,900 lei, and ordered test and change management. Date = publication of the press release; according to the authority, the investigation was concluded in the previous month.

Authority / court

Autoritatea Națională de Supraveghere a Prelucrării Datelor cu Caracter Personal (ANSPDCP)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Art. 25 Abs. 1, Art. 32 Abs. 1 lit. b und d, Abs. 2 und 4 DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Published

17 Jul 2026

Original amount 523,900 RON, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 Jul 2026.

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

From May to the end of August 2024, the public hospital accidentally published on its website a surgery list containing patients' telephone numbers, illnesses and planned procedures; a member of the public found the document via Google. The Hellenic Data Protection Authority imposed a total of 25,000 EUR: 10,000 EUR for inadequate security, 2,000 EUR for the late notification, 10,000 EUR for failing to notify the data subjects and 3,000 EUR for missing contact details of the data protection officer (DPO).

Authority / court

Αρχή Προστασίας Δεδομένων Προσωπικού Χαρακτήρα (Hellenic Data Protection Authority)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

DSGVO Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. f, 32 Abs. 1, 33 Abs. 1, 34 Abs. 1, 12, 13 i. V. m. 37 (Entscheidung 13/2026)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Healthcare

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

The data protection authority had prohibited a company from tracking its three company vehicles continuously by GPS and ordered the data to be erased; narrow purposes such as theft protection while parked remained permitted. The Upravno sodišče Republike Slovenije (Administrative Court of the Republic of Slovenia) upheld this and clarified that employee consent bundled with other declarations is invalid.

Authority / court

Upravno sodišče Republike Slovenije (bekanntgemacht durch den Informacijski pooblaščenec)

Area of law

Data protection · Employee data

Legal basis

Art. 6 Abs. 1 lit. f, Art. 7 Abs. 2 DSGVO

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Published

7 Jul 2026

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

The Garante (Italian data protection authority) fined the US operator of the generative AI service Character.AI, on which users – including minors – chat with virtual characters, 158,000 EUR, among other things for deficient privacy information, a data protection impact assessment prepared late and the late appointment of a representative in the EU. It also criticised weaknesses in the protection of minors and in age verification; within 120 days the company must ensure working age verification, an effective cooling-off period preventing blocked minors from re-registering and private-by-default profiles for minors.

Authority / court

Garante per la protezione dei dati personali

Area of law

Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 2, 12 Abs. 1, 13 Abs. 1 und 2, 14 Abs. 1 und 2, 24 Abs. 1, 25 Abs. 2, 27 Abs. 1 und 35 Abs. 1 DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Culpability

negligent

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

Mitigating: progressively strengthened age checks (a dedicated service for minors, age verification by a third-party provider), no previous relevant infringements, cooperation and amendments to the privacy policy during the proceedings.

Published

9 Jul 2026

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

At the request of a third party and outside the scope of his duties, a bank employee retrieved account statements of a data subject (name, IBAN, transactions, balances). The Romanian data protection authority (ANSPDCP) found insufficient technical and organisational measures and imposed 26,172 lei (5,000 EUR); the bank has paid the fine. Date = publication of the press release; according to the authority, the investigation was concluded in the previous month.

Authority / court

Autoritatea Națională de Supraveghere a Prelucrării Datelor cu Caracter Personal (ANSPDCP)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Art. 32 Abs. 1, 2 und 4 DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

2 Jul 2026

Original amount 26,172 RON, converted at the ECB reference rate of 2 Jul 2026.

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

In a targeted inspection of cookies on company websites, the Datu valsts inspekcija (Latvian Data State Inspectorate, DVI) found fault with the site 4mebeles.lv. After a reprimand in February 2026, the company claimed that the deficiencies had been remedied, which a further inspection disproved; further requests for information went unanswered. The DVI imposed 1,000 EUR for failure to cooperate and requested the missing information by 3 August 2026.

Authority / court

Datu valsts inspekcija (DVI)

Area of law

Data protection · Cookies and tracking

Legal basis

Art. 58 Abs. 1, Art. 83 Abs. 5 lit. e DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Culpability

intentional

Repeat case

yes

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

After almost four years of litigation, the federal district court for Idaho entered an order agreed between the FTC and the data broker Kochava. The FTC had alleged that Kochava sold precise location data from hundreds of millions of mobile devices without the knowledge and consent of the people concerned, revealing, for example, visits to health facilities and places of worship. Kochava and its subsidiary Collective Data Solutions, which has taken over the data broker business, may only share sensitive location data with affirmative consent and for services requested by the consumer, and must introduce, among other things, a sensitive-locations programme, checks on their data suppliers, disclosure of recipients and retention limits; no payment is provided for. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

Authority / court

U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho auf Klage der Federal Trade Commission (FTC)

Area of law

Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency

Legal basis

Section 5 FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45 (unlautere Praktiken); Verfahren nach Section 13(b), 15 U.S.C. § 53(b)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Published

26 Jun 2026

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The company had stored statistically calculated ‘party affinities’ for around 2.2 million people and in some cases sold them to advertising clients – special categories of personal data without consent; in addition, parcel frequency data was further processed for incompatible purposes. The Austrian Data Protection Authority (Datenschutzbehörde, DSB) had imposed 18 million EUR in 2019 and the Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht, BVwG) 16 million EUR in 2024; Austria's Supreme Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgerichtshof, VwGH) has now set the fine with final effect at 13 million EUR (plus 100,000 EUR in procedural costs).

Authority / court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Ausgangsbescheid: Datenschutzbehörde)

Area of law

Data protection · Marketing and consent

Legal basis

DSGVO Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. a und b, Art. 6 Abs. 4, Art. 9 Abs. 1 (VwGH Ro 2025/04/0007)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

reduced

Sector

Other

Culpability

negligent

Mitigating circumstances

Comprehensive cooperation, deletion of the party affinities, settlements with data subjects, long duration of proceedings (5 years, 10 months).

Published

16 Jul 2026

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

The debt collection company posted personal data of alleged debtors on the internet, some of it particularly sensitive, in order to obtain information on their whereabouts and to warn third parties. The Swiss Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht, A-3891/2025) upheld the ruling of the Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner (EDÖB) of 28 April 2025, according to which this constitutes an unjustified violation of privacy.

Authority / court

Bundesverwaltungsgericht (A-3891/2025) auf Verfügung des EDÖB vom 28.04.2025

Area of law

Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency

Legal basis

DSG Art. 6, Art. 19, Art. 31

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

20 Aug 2026

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

The security services provider used cameras in vehicles through which personal data was processed without any legal basis for doing so. The Swedish data protection authority (Integritetsskyddsmyndigheten, IMY) issued a reprimand under Art. 58 GDPR; no fine was imposed.

Authority / court

Integritetsskyddsmyndigheten (IMY)

Area of law

Data protection · Video surveillance

Legal basis

DSGVO Art. 6 Abs. 1

Action

Reprimand or warning

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Defence and security

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

An employee of the service provider acting as processor for Kaufland România let a third party into a store’s video surveillance room; that person filmed the images and distributed them on social media. Kaufland reported the incident. The Romanian data protection authority (ANSPDCP) imposed 10,200 lei (2,000 EUR) on the processor and ordered additional checks of the work instructions; the fine has been paid. Date = publication of the press release; according to the authority, the investigation was concluded in April 2026.

Authority / court

Autoritatea Națională de Supraveghere a Prelucrării Datelor cu Caracter Personal (ANSPDCP)

Area of law

Data protection · Video surveillance

Legal basis

Art. 29, Art. 32 Abs. 1 lit. b, Abs. 2 und 4 DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Other

Published

15 Jun 2026

Original amount 10,200 RON, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Jun 2026.

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

The online retailer had not set a retention period for customer accounts and kept data until customers requested deletion; purchases were only possible with an account. The sanctions board of the Finnish Data Protection Ombudsman imposed 856,000 EUR in 2024, the administrative court reduced the fine to 792,639 EUR on the basis of current turnover, and the Supreme Administrative Court (Korkein hallinto-oikeus, KHO) confirmed this on 12 June 2026.

Authority / court

Korkein hallinto-oikeus (KHO); Sanktionsgremium des Datenschutzbeauftragten

Area of law

Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. e DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

reduced

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Published

18 Jun 2026

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

A data subject complained about the disclosure of footage from the supermarket chain’s video surveillance and about the inadequate response to his access request. The Αρχή Προστασίας Δεδομένων Προσωπικού Χαρακτήρα (Hellenic Data Protection Authority) found that Market In had passed the video footage to the judicial authorities without informing the data subject beforehand, processed more data than necessary, failed to comply with the right of access and failed to cooperate with the authority, and by Decision 10/2026 imposed a total of 95,000 EUR (50,000 EUR for lawfulness/transparency, 20,000 EUR each for data minimisation and the right of access, 5,000 EUR for failure to cooperate); in the same proceedings, ΜΕΔΕ ΑΕ received 65,000 EUR.

Authority / court

Αρχή Προστασίας Δεδομένων Προσωπικού Χαρακτήρα (Hellenic Data Protection Authority)

Area of law

Data protection · Video surveillance

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. a, c, Art. 5 Abs. 2, Art. 12, 13, 15, 31 DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

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

Monash IVF collected sensitive information about visitors to its fertility treatment website through third-party tracking pixels. The Privacy Commissioner held that following the visitors of health-related websites and afterwards showing them targeted adverts on social networks amounts to collecting sensitive data, which requires consent, and found breaches of APP 3.3, 5.1, 5.2 and 7.1. Monash IVF must not continue or repeat the conduct and must implement specified remedial steps; a parallel determination against the telehealth provider Medmate Australia was made on the same day.

Authority / court

Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC)

Area of law

Data protection · Cookies and tracking

Legal basis

Privacy Act 1988 (Cth), APP 3.3, 5.1, 5.2, 7.1

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Healthcare

Published

24 Jun 2026

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

A former employee used authentication signing keys that had been accessible to him in plain text during his employment and were neither renewed nor destroyed after he left to create forged tokens and, from April to November 2025, retrieve data on around 33.22 million customers and delivery data on around 4.33 million other people. For inadequate security measures the authority imposed a penalty surcharge of 423,575,000,000 KRW on Coupang Corp. and, for late notification and failure to delete, an administrative fine of 16,800,000 KRW (423,591,800,000 KRW in total) and criticised the exclusion of the chief privacy officer from the internal investigation. A separate decision on the same day imposed a further 201,106,000,000 KRW for collecting behavioural data on third-party websites and apps without consent.

Authority / court

Personal Information Protection Commission (PIPC, 개인정보보호위원회)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Personal Information Protection Act (개인정보 보호법) Art. 29, Art. 34(1), Art. 21(1), Art. 31(6), Art. 63(2); Sanktion nach Art. 64-2(1) Nr. 9

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Culpability

negligent

Repeat case

yes

Mitigating circumstances

Reduction of 30% because no benefit was derived and 50% for remediation, compensation, certification and proportionality; increases of 25% (duration of the infringement), 30% (at least two previous penalties) and 10% (obstruction of the investigation).

Liability of senior managers

The chief privacy officer (CPO) was excluded from the internal investigation and publication; the company was ordered to set up governance that secures the CPO’s independent work and access to information in incidents.

Published

11 Jun 2026

Original amount 423,591,800,000 KRW, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Jun 2026.

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

In November 2018 attackers encrypted patient data in the laboratory information system of Midlands Regional Hospital Tullamore. The DPC found that the HSE had infringed Art. 5(1)(f), 28, 30, 32(1) and 34 GDPR (including insufficient security, deficient processor contracts and record of processing, and incomplete notification of affected persons), issued a reprimand, imposed €300,000 for the security failings (Art. 5(1)(f) and 32(1)) and ordered it to introduce specified policies and procedures for secure processing.

Authority / court

Data Protection Commission (DPC)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Art. 5(1)(f), 28, 30, 32(1), 34 DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Healthcare

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

In 2019, the Berlin Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information (BlnBDI) had imposed 14.5 million EUR on the housing group because tenant data such as salary statements, bank statements and social security data were held in an archive system with no means of deletion. Following the 2023 CJEU judgment on direct corporate liability, the Berlin Regional Court (Landgericht Berlin I) confirmed on 9 June 2026 infringements of data minimisation and storage limitation; the press release does not state the amount of the fine set by the court.

Authority / court

Landgericht Berlin I (Bußgeldbehörde: Berliner Beauftragte für Datenschutz und Informationsfreiheit)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Art. 5, Art. 25 Abs. 1 DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Construction and real estate

Liability of senior managers

According to the CJEU (C-807/21), a breach of duty by a person in a management position need not be proven for the corporate fine.

Published

10 Jun 2026

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

Due to errors by a processor of the energy supplier, incorrect details of a direct debit mandate were recorded, so that three bills instead of one were debited from the customer's account; call recordings and the mandate form had not been retained. ZENITH responded inadequately to the access request and did not correct the data (100,000 EUR), while Piraeus Bank infringed the right of access (10,000 EUR and a reprimand); Decision No. 8/2026 of the Hellenic Data Protection Authority.

Authority / court

Αρχή Προστασίας Δεδομένων Προσωπικού Χαρακτήρα (Hellenic DPA)

Area of law

Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. d, Art. 12 Abs. 3, Art. 15, Art. 28 DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Energy and utilities

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

According to the complaint by the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Illuminate promised schools data security but did not adequately protect its cloud databases, even though a service provider had pointed out vulnerabilities almost two years earlier; a hacker accessed data on 10.1 million students, including health information. The order requires an information security programme, data minimisation and a public deletion schedule, and prohibits misrepresentations about security and notification deadlines.

Authority / court

Federal Trade Commission (FTC)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

FTC Act (Verbot unlauterer und irreführender Praktiken)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Culpability

negligent

Published

5 Jun 2026

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