Who was sanctioned, and for what?

According to the KFTC (Korea Fair Trade Commission, Korea's competition authority), six manufacturers and distributors of printing paper fixed in advance the winning bidder, cover bidders and bid prices in six tenders issued by the publisher Nongmin News Corp. between June 2021 and November 2024; the average winning bid rate was around 96.2%, compared with 87.6% in 2018 to 2020. The KFTC issued corrective orders, imposed fines totalling KRW 3,009 million (Moorim SP KRW 59 million, Moorim Paper KRW 573 million, Moorim P&P KRW 948 million, Hansol Paper KRW 556 million, Hankuk Paper KRW 515 million, Hongwon Paper KRW 358 million).

Authority / court

Korea Fair Trade Commission (KFTC)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Art. 40 Abs. 1 Nr. 8 MRFTA (Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Published

9 Sep 2026

Original amount 3,009,000,000 KRW, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Sep 2026.

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

From 2016 to 2022, three distributors of test and measuring equipment coordinated discounts as essential price components and informed each other of customer contacts, usually with a request for "restraint". This was evidenced by more than 400 emails; the proceedings ended in settlements.

Authority / court

Bundeskartellamt

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

§ 1 GWB

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Mitigating circumstances

Settlement; cooperation by Elektronik-Kontor Messtechnik taken into account

Published

15 Jul 2026

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

In cartel proceedings, the CADE Tribunal fined ten suppliers of electronic products, while the signatories of a 2014 leniency agreement (Agilent and Keysight) and one company that had fulfilled a settlement were not sanctioned. The fines on the companies initially totalled 8,362,138.05 BRL; in the virtual deliberation procedure the plenary, deciding on motions for clarification (embargos) on 17 August 2026, reduced of its own motion the fines on Datasonic (from 4,329,605.69 to 856,937.12 BRL) and D.T.I. (from 1,021,750.18 to 265,406.99 BRL), leaving 4,133,126.29 BRL. The session minutes do not identify the market concerned. The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

Authority / court

Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica (CADE), Tribunal Administrativo

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Lei nº 12.529/2011

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

reduced

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

8 Jul 2026

Original amount 4,133,126.29 BRL, converted at the ECB reference rate of 1 Jul 2026.

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

From 13 May 2015 to 20 November 2023, Nexans granted companies of the Sonepar group exclusive rights to import Nexans cables into La Réunion, Mayotte, French Guiana, Martinique and Guadeloupe, which Art. L. 420-2-1 of the Code de commerce (French Commercial Code) prohibits for the overseas territories. In a settlement procedure the Autorité de la concurrence (French Competition Authority) imposed EUR 3 million on Nexans France (jointly with Nexans SA) and EUR 3.5 million on the Sonepar companies involved, EUR 6.5 million in total. It is the authority’s first decision based on a report by a person with protected whistleblower status.

Authority / court

Autorité de la concurrence

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Art. L. 420-2-1 Code de commerce; Vergleichsverfahren nach Art. L. 464-2 III Code de commerce

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Mitigating circumstances

Settlement procedure (transaction): the companies did not contest the objections.

Published

2 Apr 2026

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

Manufacturers and suppliers of copper and aluminium cables coordinated a common calculation of the metal surcharge, which makes up a significant part of the final price; an industry association acted as facilitator. The Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (Antimonopoly Office of the Slovak Republic, PMÚ SR) imposed a total of 97,434,800 EUR, the highest amount in a single proceeding; two leniency applicants were not fined (not final). Addressees: ELKOND HHK, a.s.; VUKI a.s.; Prysmian Kablo s.r.o.; Prysmian Kabely, s.r.o.; Kablo Vrchlabí s.r.o.; NKT s.r.o.; PRECON s.r.o.; Tele–Fonika Kabely CZ s.r.o.; KABELOVNA KABEX a. s.; Asociace výrobců kabelů a vodičů ČR a SR (leniency applicants without a fine: ICS Industrial Cables Slovakia, PRAKAB).

Authority / court

Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (PMÚ SR)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Slowakisches Wettbewerbsschutzgesetz (Kartellverbot)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Culpability

intentional

Published

11 Mar 2026

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

The Tribunal of the Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica (CADE, Brazilian competition authority) unanimously convicted the manufacturers Elo Sistemas Eletrônicos, FAE Sistemas de Medição (formerly Fae Ferragens e Aparelhos Elétricos) and Dowertech da Amazônia (now Wasion da Amazônia) of a cartel in electricity meters, in which between 2005 and 2014 prices in public and private tenders were agreed, the market was shared and monitored and cover bids were submitted. The companies received fines of 54,238,824.03 BRL, 15,167,886.53 BRL and 3,196,631.43 BRL. The case was triggered by a leniency application in 2014; in the same session CADE approved four further settlements worth around 15.5 million BRL. The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

Authority / court

Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica (CADE), Tribunal Administrativo

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Lei nº 12.529/2011 (Lei de Defesa da Concorrência)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

10 Dec 2025

Original amount 72,603,341.99 BRL, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Dec 2025.

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

The CADE Tribunal approved a cease-and-desist settlement (TCC) with Rinnai Brasil in proceedings concerning the market for gas water heaters: according to the General Superintendence, the company had abused its dominant position by imposing minimum advertised prices on resellers, which acted as minimum advertised pricing in physical retail and in practice as resale price maintenance online. Rinnai undertook to cease the practices, to take precautions against new infringements and allegedly to pay 11,215,319.31 BRL to the Fund for Diffuse Rights (FDD). The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

Authority / court

Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica (CADE), Tribunal Administrativo

Area of law

Competition law · Abuse of market power

Legal basis

Lei nº 12.529/2011 (Termo de Compromisso de Cessação)

Action

Other

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Published

11 Dec 2025

Original amount 11,215,319.31 BRL, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Dec 2025.

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

UOKiK sanctioned CNH Industrial Polska and seven dealers of the New Holland, Case IH and Steyr brands for dividing the Polish market for agricultural machinery of these brands and coordinating prices. The fines on the undertakings total PLN 338,827,000 (CNH Industrial Polska 241,599,000, Raitech 24,391,000, Perkoz 23,778,000, Adler Agro 15,335,000, Rolserwis 13,356,000, a further dealer company (partnership) 8,249,000, Kisiel Agrotech 6,778,000, Kisiel 5,341,000 PLN). Fines on natural persons are not included in the amount. The decision is not final.

Authority / court

Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Konkurencji i Konsumentów (UOKiK)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Art. 6 Abs. 1 Nr. 1 und 3 ustawa o ochronie konkurencji i konsumentów; Art. 101 Abs. 1 lit. a und c AEUV

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not reported here.

Original amount 338,827,000 PLN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Dec 2025.

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

The Kartellgericht (Cartel Court) fined Pfanner Schutzbekleidung GmbH, Protos GmbH and their holding company (now Pronocer Holding GmbH) 400,000 EUR because, from 9 March 2016 to 25 November 2021, they fixed their dealers' resale prices for work and protective clothing in Austria. Compliance was monitored systematically, dealers who deviated were contacted, and in 2019 a circular reminded all dealers of the prices. Reductions were granted for the settlement, cooperation and a newly introduced compliance system.

Authority / court

Oberlandesgericht Wien als Kartellgericht (Antrag der Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

§ 1 Abs. 1 und 4 KartG und Art. 101 AEUV; § 29 Z 1 lit. a und d KartG

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

Consensual termination of the proceedings, cooperation with the BWB (Federal Competition Authority), introduction of a compliance system.

Published

18 Sep 2026

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

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) found that Safran’s acquisition of part of the actuation and flight control business of Collins Aerospace (RTX) would result in a substantial lessening of competition in horizontal stabiliser trim actuators. Clearance was granted only in return for the undertaking to divest Safran’s North American actuation business, including sites in Mexico, California and Canada, to a pre-approved purchaser (Woodward).

Authority / court

Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)

Area of law

Competition law · Merger control

Legal basis

Enterprise Act 2002, s. 73 (Undertakings in lieu of reference)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

23 Jun 2025

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

The Kartellgericht (Cartel Court) imposed fines totalling 634,000 EUR for vertical resale price maintenance on Sennheiser-brand consumer electronics audio products (headphones): 534,000 EUR on Sennheiser electronic SE & Co KG for May 2015 to February 2022 and 100,000 EUR on Sonova AG for March to September 2022. Retailers were given end-customer prices whose observance was monitored; both companies cooperated and did not contest the facts.

Authority / court

Oberlandesgericht Wien als Kartellgericht (Antrag der Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Art. 101 Abs. 1 AEUV und § 1 Abs. 1 KartG; § 29 Z 1 lit. a und d KartG

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Culpability

intentional

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

Full cooperation in clarifying the facts; all essential facts left undisputed (acknowledgement).

Published

16 Dec 2025

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

The Autorité de la concurrence (French Competition Authority) sanctioned two vertical price agreements in the distribution of low-voltage electrical equipment: Schneider Electric with the wholesalers Rexel and Sonepar (13 December 2012 to 6 September 2018) and Legrand with Rexel (24 May 2012 to 14 September 2015). Through the system of so-called “dérogations”, i.e. special discounts granted by the manufacturers on the standard purchase price for particular end customers, the distributors’ prices to those customers were in effect fixed. Fines: Schneider Electric 207 million, Rexel 124 million, Sonepar 96 million and Legrand 43 million EUR.

Authority / court

Autorité de la concurrence

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Art. L. 420-1 Code de commerce; Art. 101 Abs. 1 AEUV

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

30 Oct 2024

Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

According to the Competition Commission's investigation, the manufacturer and a competitor had agreed since around 1998 not to compete for each other's traditional customers for packaging paper, coordinated bids and met regularly for that purpose; they also allegedly fixed prices when buying recyclable paper. In a settlement without admission of liability, the manufacturer pays ZAR 21,298,478.38 in three instalments and introduces a compliance programme.

Authority / court

Competition Tribunal of South Africa (auf Antrag der Competition Commission)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Competition Act 89 of 1998, s. 4(1)(b)(i), (ii) und (iii); ss. 49D, 58(1)(a)(iii), 58(1)(b)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Mitigating circumstances

Settlement without admission of liability; payment in instalments.

Published

14 Aug 2024

Original amount 21,298,478.38 ZAR, converted at the ECB reference rate of 14 Aug 2024.

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 14 Aug 2026 · Direct link

The Dutch manufacturer of inverters and chargers allegedly ensured through its distributors, from March 2020 until at least the end of 2022, that online retailers granted no more than 10–15% discount on recommended retail prices, under threat of reduced discounts or cut-off of supply (minimum resale price maintenance). In a settlement without admission of liability, the manufacturer pays ZAR 14,232,581 and must introduce a compliance programme including training on resale price maintenance.

Authority / court

Competition Tribunal of South Africa (auf Antrag der Competition Commission)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Competition Act 89 of 1998, s. 5(2); ss. 49D, 58(1)(a)(iii), 58(1)(b), 59

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Mitigating circumstances

Settlement without admission of liability; the manufacturer pointed to the lack of after-sales support with cut-price offers.

Published

17 Sep 2024

Original amount 14,232,581 ZAR, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 Jul 2024.

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 26 Jul 2026 · Direct link

In a settlement procedure, the competition authority found that two suppliers of fire protection products (supplier A and supplier B) shared public customers between them in tenders and negotiated procedures for fire protection products from April 2009 to September 2016 by refraining from bidding or submitting cover bids. Supplier B and a further company of its group must pay allegedly 2,207,682 EUR jointly and severally; supplier A, as first leniency applicant, received a fine of 0 EUR and committed to compensating injured customers and to a donation of 50,000 EUR to a charity.

Authority / court

Autorité belge de la Concurrence / Belgische Mededingingsautoriteit (ABC/BMA) – Auditorat (Vergleichsentscheidung)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Art. IV.1 Code de droit économique (CDE), Art. 101 AEUV; Art. IV.59, IV.60 und IV.79 § 1 CDE

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Mitigating circumstances

Settlement; according to the press release supplier B obtained a 50% reduction for its cooperation; supplier A received immunity as first leniency applicant.

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

8 Jul 2024

Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Version 2 · Company name anonymised since 8 Jul 2026 · Direct link

The Kartellgericht (Cartel Court) imposed a joint fine of EUR 3 million on an Austrian industrial goods manufacturer and its owning entity for a long-running infringement in the distribution of its own products in Austria between 2007 and 2021. Resale prices, a territorial split and non-compete obligations were agreed with authorised dealers, together with concerted practices such as cover bids. The companies acknowledged the infringement and received reductions for cooperation and settlement.

Authority / court

Oberlandesgericht Wien als Kartellgericht (Antrag der Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

§ 1 KartG und Art. 101 AEUV; § 29 Z 1 lit. a und d KartG

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Culpability

intentional

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

Acknowledgement of the infringement; reductions for cooperation and settlement.

Published

10 Jan 2025

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Company name anonymised since 27 Jun 2026 · Direct link

The Bundeskartellamt (Federal Cartel Office) fined the Austrian supplier of functional and protective clothing 783,900 EUR because, from early 2016 to the end of November 2021, it had agreed with specialist retailers in Germany that their resale prices – in store and online – should as far as possible match the recommended retail price and that cash discounts should generally not be granted. The case was triggered by a retailer's cooperation request; the authority used requests for information under Section 82b GWB (German Competition Act), and the fining decision is final following a settlement.

Authority / court

Bundeskartellamt

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Mitigating circumstances

Prompt, comprehensive and cooperative replies to two requests for information; agreement to a settlement.

Published

13 Mar 2024

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 19 Feb 2026 · Direct link

From January 2015 to December 2018, the sales company used price recommendations, price monitoring and the passing-on of retailer complaints to get seven (online) retailers to raise their selling prices for the manufacturer's televisions. The ACM (Autoriteit Consument & Markt, Dutch competition and consumer authority) classified this as prohibited vertical coordination and imposed a fine of 7,943,500 EUR, which the Rechtbank Rotterdam (Rotterdam District Court) upheld on 7 August 2025.

Authority / court

Autoriteit Consument & Markt (ACM)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Art. 6 Abs. 1 Mededingingswet, Art. 101 Abs. 1 AEUV

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Published

12 Sep 2023

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 11 Jul 2025 · Direct link

On 14 June 2023 the Competition Tribunal (Hong Kong's specialist competition court), on a joint application with the Competition Commission (Hong Kong's competition authority), imposed pecuniary penalties on three suppliers of mail inserters of the same brand that had fixed prices, shared markets and rigged bids between April 2018 and January 2019 (breach of the First Conduct Rule). The brand manufacturer's two Hong Kong companies (which formerly traded under the brand name) pay 1,399,000 HKD together, the second supplier 3,372,000 HKD and the third supplier 808,000 HKD, 5,579,000 HKD in total; in addition each pays 476,101 HKD in investigation costs plus legal costs. It was the first case in which all parties under investigation cooperated with the authority under its cooperation policy already at the investigation stage; in return the Commission refrained from pursuing the employees involved.

Authority / court

Competition Tribunal (Hongkong), auf Antrag der Competition Commission

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Competition Ordinance (Cap. 619), s. 6 (First Conduct Rule), s. 93 (pecuniary penalty), s. 96 (Ermittlungskosten)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Mitigating circumstances

Cooperation discounts of 25% (brand manufacturer, second supplier) and 28% (third supplier); liability and penalties agreed by consent.

Published

15 Jun 2023

Original amount 5,579,000 HKD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 14 Jun 2023.

Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 14 Jun 2025 · Direct link

The competition authority sanctioned one cable maker as well as a second manufacturer and its parent company because, at least from June 2015 to May 2020, they took turns fixing the winners of tenders by the national transmission grid operator for extra-high-voltage cables, used the loser as subcontractor and settled turnover between them. In the settlement procedure (transação) the authority imposed 1,020,800 EUR on the first manufacturer and 1,035,000 EUR on the second manufacturer and its parent company, 2,055,800 EUR in total.

Authority / court

Autoridade da Concorrência (AdC)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Art. 9 Lei n.º 19/2012 (Lei da Concorrência); Art. 101 Abs. 1 AEUV

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Culpability

intentional

Mitigating circumstances

Settlement procedure with admission and waiver of appeal; fines reduced, also in view of the financial situation.

Published

28 Feb 2023

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Company name anonymised since 10 Feb 2025 · Direct link