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.
Click a bar to drill down one level.
Where?
by regionAll jurisdictions
What for?
by topicWho?
by company- Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (Teva-Gruppe) €462.6m 95 % · 1 case
- Alkaloids of Australia, Alkaloids Corporation, Boehringer, Linnea, Transo-Pharm (C2 PHARMA Kronzeuge) €13.4m 3 % · 1 case
- Johnson & Johnson Consumer NV; Boehringer Ingelheim SComm; Haleon Belgium NV €11.2m 2 % · 1 case
- Viatris Inc. €1.8m 0 % · 1 case
- Henkel AG & Co. KGaA — 0 % · 1 case
- Tamro Eesti OÜ — 0 % · 1 case
When?
per quarter, by date of decision| Period | Cases | Total |
|---|---|---|
| Q3 2023 | 0 | — |
| Q4 2023 | 1 | €13.4m |
| Q1 2024 | 0 | — |
| Q2 2024 | 0 | — |
| Q3 2024 | 0 | — |
| Q4 2024 | 2 | €464.4m |
| Q1 2025 | 0 | — |
| Q2 2025 | 1 | €11.2m |
| Q3 2025 | 1 | — |
| Q4 2025 | 0 | — |
| Q1 2026 | 0 | — |
| Q2 2026 | 0 | — |
| Q3 2026 | 1 | — |
6 cases
31 Oct 2024 Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (Teva-Gruppe)EU: 462.6 million EUR against Teva for patent misuse and disparaging a competing medicine €462.6m
Teva abused its dominant position for the MS medicine Copaxone: it artificially extended patent protection by filing staggered divisional applications with the EPO and strategically withdrawing them, and spread misleading statements about an authorised competing product among physicians and decision-makers. Seven Member States were affected over periods of four to nine years.
Communications by sales representatives and medical affairs about competing products must be substantiated and objective; patent strategies of dominant companies require competition law review.
Disparaging statements about competing products to healthcare professionals
- Authority / court
- Europäische Kommission
- Area of law
- Competition law · Abuse of market power
- Legal basis
- Art. 102 AEUV
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
- Employees
- 10,000 or more
- Commission fines Teva €462.6 million over misuse of the patent system and disparagement (IP/24/5581) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
14 Aug 2026 Henkel AG & Co. KGaAHenkel/Liquid Nails: court blocks takeover of Loctite’s main competitor Order
Henkel wanted to buy the construction adhesive brand Liquid Nails for 725 million USD from the financial investor American Industrial Partners, thereby taking over the main competitor of its Loctite brand. After a seven-day trial, the federal court, on application by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), issued a permanent injunction against the acquisition.
Acquiring the closest competitor carries a high risk of prohibition, even at a moderate deal volume.
- Authority / court
- U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (auf Antrag der FTC)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Merger control
- Legal basis
- Section 7 Clayton Act; Section 13(b) FTC Act (Permanent Injunction)
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
- Employees
- 10,000 or more
- Published
- 17 Aug 2026
- Statement on FTC Win Blocking Loctite, Liquid Nails Construction Adhesive Merger (17.08.2026) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
25 Jul 2025 Tamro Eesti OÜTamro Eesti: order against unfair payment terms for food supplements Order
In consignment agreements, the pharmaceutical wholesaler had made payment to suppliers of food supplements dependent on subsequent resale (payment period over 30 days) and had reserved the right to hold suppliers liable for spoiled goods. The Konkurentsiamet (Estonian Competition Authority) found infringements of the act on unfair trading practices in the food supply chain and ordered amended contractual terms.
Purchasing terms in the food sector – including for food supplements – must comply with the 30-day payment period and the prohibition on shifting risk.
- Authority / court
- Konkurentsiamet (Estnische Wettbewerbsbehörde)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Abuse of market power
- Legal basis
- § 4 Abs. 1 und 2, § 5 Abs. 2, § 7 Abs. 1 PTEKS (UTP-Richtlinie (EU) 2019/633)
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
- Ettekirjutus Tamro Eesti OÜ-le ebaausate kaubandustavade kasutamise lõpetamiseks nr 11-4/2025-001, 25.07.2025 Decision of an authority
- Konkurentsiamet – Ausad kaubandustavad: juhtumid Official register or notice
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
24 Apr 2025 Johnson & Johnson Consumer NV; Boehringer Ingelheim SComm; Haleon Belgium NVJohnson & Johnson, Boehringer, Haleon: 11.2 million EUR for shelf-placement collusion in pharmacies €11.2m
Over more than 15 years, the three OTC medicine manufacturers jointly developed the category management project ‘SMAN’, through which they steered the placement of non-prescription medicines in selected pharmacies in their favour and disadvantaged or excluded competing products. In a settlement procedure, the Autorité belge de la Concurrence / Belgische Mededingingsautoriteit (Belgian Competition Authority, BMA) imposed a total of 11,249,280.48 EUR.
Category management agreements with retailers must not push competitors off the shelf – joint planograms with competitors are off limits.
Competition law limits of category management
- Authority / court
- Autorité belge de la Concurrence / Belgische Mededingingsautoriteit (BMA)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- Code de droit économique Art. IV.1; AEUV Art. 101
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
- Employees
- 10,000 or more
- Published
- 24 Apr 2025
- BMA – Communiqué de presse N°16/2025 (24.04.2025) Press release of an authority
- BMA – Beslissing BMA-2025-RPR-13-AUD (SMAN), publieke versie Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
22 Nov 2024 Viatris Inc.Viatris: 1.5 million GBP – key staff replaced despite hold-separate order €1.8m
During the review of the sale of the European rights to the hormone products Duphaston and Femoston to Theramex, an Initial Enforcement Order was in force. Viatris replaced members of the UK management without the consent of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) and subsequently failed to report the breach; the CMA imposed 1.5 million GBP.
During a merger review, staffing decisions in the target business also require consent – and breaches must be reported immediately.
Standstill and interim obligations in merger proceedings (management, HR)
- Authority / court
- Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Merger control
- Legal basis
- Enterprise Act 2002, s. 72(2) (Initial Enforcement Order), s. 94A
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
- Employees
- 10,000 or more
Original amount 1,500,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Nov 2024.
- CMA: Viatris fined £1.5m for failure to comply with CMA order (22.11.2024) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
19 Oct 2023 Alkaloids of Australia, Alkaloids Corporation, Boehringer, Linnea, Transo-Pharm (C2 PHARMA Kronzeuge)EU: 13.4 million EUR against pharmaceutical ingredient cartel (SNBB for Buscopan) €13.4m
From 2005 to 2019, six manufacturers and traders of the active ingredient SNBB (the base substance for Buscopan and generics) fixed minimum prices, allocated quotas and exchanged sensitive information. This was the first cartel concerning an active pharmaceutical ingredient that the Commission has sanctioned; C2 PHARMA received full immunity, and all parties reached a settlement.
Even small niche markets for active ingredients are in the spotlight – contacts with competitors about prices or volumes are off-limits.
Price and quota agreements in the trade in active ingredients
- Authority / court
- Europäische Kommission
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- Art. 101 AEUV, Art. 53 EWR-Abkommen
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
- Mitigating circumstances
- Leniency programme (C2 PHARMA 100 %, Transo-Pharm 50 %, Linnea 30 %), 10 % settlement reduction
- Commission fines pharma companies €13,4 million in antitrust cartel settlement (IP/23/5104) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link