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.

13cases from 3 jurisdictions
€186.4mTotal of monetary amounts (12 cases with an amount)
€5.4mMedian 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 20232€24.2m
Q1 20240—
Q2 20241€98,722
Q3 20240—
Q4 20243€2.96m
Q1 20251€70m
Q2 20252€16.5m
Q3 20251—
Q4 20250—
Q1 20260—
Q2 20260—
Q3 20263€72.7m

13 cases

6 Aug 2026 AS Asphaltstraßensanierung GmbH, BITUNOVA GmbH, Kutter Spezialstraßenbau GmbH & Co. KG, Possehl Construction GmbH (inkl. VSI), Liesen…alles für den Bau GmbH, OAT GmbH/Otto Alte-Teigeler GmbHBundeskartellamt: 60.3 million EUR against DSK road repair cartel GermanyCartels and collusion €60.3m

From around 2010 to September 2019, six suppliers of thin cold-laid asphalt surface layers (Dünne Asphaltdeckschichten in Kaltbauweise, DSK) allocated customers – primarily public contracting authorities – and contracts among themselves nationwide and coordinated prices. Germany's Federal Cartel Office (Bundeskartellamt) imposed fines of around 60.3 million EUR; all proceedings ended in settlements.

What organisations can take from it

Anyone who "shares out" public contracts regionally risks fines running into millions – calculations and bids must always be prepared independently.

Relevance to training and awareness

Customer allocation and bid rigging in public contracts

Authority / court
Bundeskartellamt
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
§ 1 GWB, Art. 101 AEUV
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Construction and real estate
Mitigating circumstances
Leniency bonus for Possehl/VSI, Bitunova, Kutter and AS; settlement
Published
6 Aug 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.

21 Jul 2026 Maxxis International GmbH, Best4Tires Berlin GmbH, Reifen Müller GmbH & Co. KGBundeskartellamt: 11.9 million EUR over resale price maintenance in tyre distribution (Maxxis/CST) GermanyCartels and collusion €11.9m

Maxxis guaranteed wholesalers fixed margins per tyre sold of the Maxxis and CST brands, monitored prices in particular on the Tyre24 platform and intervened when prices were too low. Germany's Federal Cartel Office (Bundeskartellamt) imposed fines totalling 11.9 million EUR on three companies and one responsible individual.

What organisations can take from it

Margin guarantees and price controls vis-à-vis dealers constitute prohibited resale price maintenance – sales teams need clear rules for price discussions.

Relevance to training and awareness

Influencing resale prices and price monitoring on platforms

Authority / court
Bundeskartellamt
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
§ 1 GWB (vertikale Preisbindung)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Automotive
Mitigating circumstances
Settlement with Maxxis and Reifen Müller
Liability of senior managers
Fine imposed on one responsible natural person (not named)
Published
21 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.

15 Jul 2026 CalPlus GmbH, Elektronik-Kontor Messtechnik GmbH, TVW Meßtechnik GmbHBundeskartellamt: 453,000 EUR against distributors of test and measuring equipment GermanyCartels and collusion €453,000

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.

What organisations can take from it

Small distributors are liable too: merely asking a competitor to "hold back" with a customer is a prohibited customer allocation agreement.

Relevance to training and awareness

Email contacts with competitors about customers and discounts

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

Report an error

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

25 Aug 2025 PAUPE HOLDING SA, Bitusag S.A., Bitusag Neuchâtel SA, Wyss Fils SA, Prodo SA, Duckert SAWEKO fines road maintenance firms in Jura/Neuchâtel over bid rigging SwitzerlandCartels and collusion Fine

Regional suppliers of surface treatments and chip sealing in road maintenance colluded on bids and allocated territories. Switzerland's Competition Commission (Wettbewerbskommission, WEKO) imposed sanctions on Bitusag/Paupe (jointly and severally, CHF 640,000–990,000, exact amount redacted), Wyss Fils (CHF 44,000–74,000), Prodo (CHF 760) and Duckert (CHF 0) and approved amicable settlements; the investigation against Colas Suisse was discontinued.

What organisations can take from it

Small regional road builders are also sanctioned – cover bids and territorial protection must disappear from corporate culture.

Relevance to training and awareness

Cover bids and territorial agreements in regional road construction

Authority / court
Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 5 Abs. 3 i.V.m. Abs. 1 KG, Art. 49a Abs. 1 KG
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Mitigating circumstances
Amicable settlements; leniency programme (Duckert free of sanctions)

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.

13 May 2025 AS Asphaltstraßensanierung, BITUNOVA, Mainka u. a. (Straßenerhaltungskartell, 7 Unternehmen)Bundeskartellamt: 10.5 million EUR against seven road repair companies GermanyCartels and collusion €10.5m

From 2016 to 2019, seven road repair companies allocated contracting authorities regionally, determined in advance who should win the contract and set each other minimum prices for cover bids. The Bundeskartellamt imposed fines of 10.5 million EUR; BITUNOVA cooperated as leniency applicant, and all proceedings ended in settlements. Addressees: AS Asphaltstraßensanierung GmbH, bausion Strassenbau-Produkte GmbH, BITUNOVA GmbH, Gerhard Herbers GmbH, Liesen … alles für den Bau GmbH, Mainka GmbH Straßenunterhaltung, MOT Müritzer Oberflächentechnik GmbH.

What organisations can take from it

Cover bids are not only subject to fines but, for the employees involved, a criminal offence of bid rigging.

Relevance to training and awareness

Cover bids and territorial agreements in tenders

Authority / court
Bundeskartellamt
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
§ 1 GWB
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Construction and real estate
Mitigating circumstances
Leniency programme (BITUNOVA), settlement
Liability of senior managers
Criminal prosecution of the individuals involved by the Düsseldorf public prosecutor's office
Published
13 May 2025

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.

7 May 2025 Sennheiser electronic SE & Co. KG, Sonova Consumer Hearing Sales Germany GmbHBundeskartellamt: almost 6 million EUR against Sennheiser and Sonova over resale price maintenance GermanyCartels and collusion €6m

Since at least 2015, Sennheiser coordinated consumer prices for premium headphones with dealers, monitored them using price comparison services and specialist software and intervened when prices were too low; Sonova continued this after acquiring the business unit in March 2022 until September 2022. The employees had received competition law training but used this knowledge to conceal their conduct (code language). The Bundeskartellamt imposed fines of almost 6 million EUR on both companies and three responsible employees (settlement).

What organisations can take from it

Price monitoring software is no licence: anyone who responds to deviations by putting pressure on dealers is engaging in prohibited resale price maintenance – and employees are personally liable.

Relevance to training and awareness

Price discussions with dealers and price monitoring

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Bundeskartellamt
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
§ 1 GWB (vertikale Preisbindung)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Mitigating circumstances
Extensive cooperation and settlement
Liability of senior managers
Fines imposed on three responsible employees (not named)
Published
7 May 2025

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.

28 Jan 2025 OGH raises gun-jumping fine against food retailer from 1.5 to 70 million EUR AustriaMerger control €70m

A food retail group anonymised in the decision (R*) had, through its subsidiary, implemented a notifiable concentration without merger control clearance by means of a long-term lease of store space in a shopping centre (1 July 2018 to 20 September 2022). The Cartel Court (Kartellgericht) imposed a fine of 1.5 million EUR; Austria's Supreme Court (Oberster Gerichtshof, OGH) upheld the appeals of the Federal Competition Authority (Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde, BWB) and the Federal Cartel Prosecutor (Bundeskartellanwalt) and set the fine at 70 million EUR, taking into account the group turnover of 92.3 billion EUR and an earlier fine for prohibited implementation.

What organisations can take from it

Taking over stores by way of a lease or tenancy agreement can also be a notifiable concentration – expansion departments must check merger control requirements.

Relevance to training and awareness

Notification requirement for site takeovers through leases or tenancy agreements

Authority / court
Oberster Gerichtshof als Kartellobergericht (Antrag der Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
§ 29 Z 1 lit a iVm § 17 Abs 1 KartG 2005
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Repeat case
yes
Sources

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 Strabag AG (Köln); Kemna Bau Andreae GmbH & Co. KG als Kronzeuge ohne BußgeldBundeskartellamt: 2.79 million EUR against Strabag over collusion on Cologne's Zoobrücke GermanyCartels and collusion €2.79m

In the tender for the refurbishment of the Zoobrücke bridge in Cologne in early 2017, employees agreed that one company would submit a cover bid so that the other would win the contract, in return for a later compensation payment. Strabag received a fine of 2.79 million EUR (settlement); the proceedings against Kemna were discontinued as it was the leniency applicant.

What organisations can take from it

A single rigged tender is enough for a fine and criminal proceedings – compensation payments between bidders are a clear red flag.

Relevance to training and awareness

Cover bids and compensation payments in individual tenders

Authority / court
Bundeskartellamt
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
§ 1 GWB
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Construction and real estate
Employees
10,000 or more
Mitigating circumstances
Settlement
Liability of senior managers
The Cologne public prosecutor's office is prosecuting the individuals involved under Section 298 StGB (German Criminal Code)
Published
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.

16 Oct 2024 OGH: 100,000 EUR gun-jumping fine for premature start of a mask production joint venture AustriaMerger control €100,000

A textile company started operations with a joint venture (H* GmbH) for the production of protective masks on 24 April 2020, before the notifiable concentration had been cleared; the infringement lasted until 25 May 2020. The Cartel Court imposed a fine of 5,000 EUR; the OGH increased the fine to 100,000 EUR.

What organisations can take from it

The standstill obligation applies even in emergencies such as the pandemic – a joint venture may only start operating after clearance.

Relevance to training and awareness

Standstill obligation before clearance (gun-jumping), including in crisis situations

Authority / court
Oberster Gerichtshof als Kartellobergericht (Antrag der Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
§ 29 Z 1 lit a iVm § 17 Abs 1 KartG 2005
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Other
Culpability
intentional
Sources

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.

16 Oct 2024 OGH: 65,000 EUR fine against joinery over cover bids and market sharing AustriaCartels and collusion €65,000

From February 2011 to October 2016, a construction and furniture joinery anonymised in the decision (J*, together with its general partner GmbH) participated in agreements on successful bidders, cover bids, market sharing and information exchange in tenders in Lower Austria and Vienna. The Cartel Court imposed a fine of 55,000 EUR only for 26 infringements up to June 2016; the OGH upheld the appeals of the BWB and the Federal Cartel Prosecutor and set a fine of 65,000 EUR on a joint and several basis for the entire period.

What organisations can take from it

Even small craft businesses are penalised for cover bids – "courtesy bids" among colleagues are competition law infringements.

Relevance to training and awareness

Cover bids in tenders for craft trades

Authority / court
Oberster Gerichtshof als Kartellobergericht (Antrag der Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
§ 1 Abs 1 KartG 2005, §§ 28, 29 KartG
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Construction and real estate
Sources

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.

10 Jun 2024 Favre SA Transports Internationaux TIR Martigny; weitere Parteien: Favre et Studer SA, RETRIPA VALAIS SA, TMR, Centre de Transferts Martigny SAWEKO: sanction against Valais transport and waste disposal firm over bid rigging SwitzerlandCartels and collusion €98,722

Companies engaged in the collection, transport and disposal of waste in Valais colluded on bids. WEKO imposed a sanction of CHF 95,138 on Favre SA TIR Martigny (Favre et Studer: CHF 0), approved amicable settlements and apportioned the procedural costs among four companies.

What organisations can take from it

Municipal waste disposal contracts are a focus of competition authorities – contacts about bids among competitors are off-limits, including among SMEs.

Relevance to training and awareness

Collusion in municipal waste disposal tenders

Authority / court
Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 5 Abs. 3 i.V.m. Abs. 1 KG, Art. 49a Abs. 1 KG
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Transport, logistics and shipping
Mitigating circumstances
Amicable settlements; leniency programme (Favre et Studer free of sanctions)

Original amount 95,138 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Jun 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.

14 Dec 2023 BeMo Tunnelling, Echterhoff-Holland, Eiffage Infra-West, Fenne, Gehrken, IH Inpako, IHT, Karger, Korte, Mainka Bau, Möllmann, Rostek & Pesch, T&M Baugesellschaft, AKM VerwaltungsgesellschaftBundeskartellamt: 4.8 million EUR against 14 construction firms over collusion in industrial construction GermanyCartels and collusion €4.8m

13 construction companies colluded on industrial construction contracts of Hüttenwerke Krupp Mannesmann (2011–2016), ThyssenKrupp Steel Europe (2007–2017) and Deutsche Edelstahlwerke (2014–2016) and sent each other their calculations so that the others could submit higher sham bids. The Bundeskartellamt imposed fines and liability amounts totalling around 4.8 million EUR on the companies, the former parent company AKM (the first liability amounts under the 2017 amendment to the GWB, the German Act against Restraints of Competition) and twelve responsible individuals; the leniency applicant Hermann Kassens escaped a fine.

What organisations can take from it

Contracts from private industrial customers such as steelworks are also protected against bid rigging – exchanging calculations with competitors is prohibited.

Relevance to training and awareness

Bid rigging in private industrial contracts

Authority / court
Bundeskartellamt
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
§ 1 GWB
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Construction and real estate
Mitigating circumstances
Settlement by almost all companies; leniency applicant Hermann Kassens Bauunternehmung (proceedings discontinued)
Liability of senior managers
Fines or liability amounts imposed on twelve responsible individuals
Published
14 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.

4 Dec 2023 Swisscom (Schweiz) AGWEKO: CHF 18.4 million against Swisscom over fibre network roll-out strategy SwitzerlandAbuse of market power €19.4m

Swisscom expanded its fibre-optic network in such a way that competitors were not given Layer 1 access from the local exchanges. WEKO considered this to be an abuse of a dominant position, imposed a sanction of CHF 18,362,014, required Swisscom to retrofit the network and imposed procedural costs of CHF 927,307.

What organisations can take from it

Dominant network operators must assess infrastructure decisions for their consequences for competitors' access.

Authority / court
Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Art. 7 Abs. 1 i.V.m. Abs. 2 lit. a und e KG, Art. 49a Abs. 1 KG
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
under appeal
Sector
Telecoms, IT and software
Employees
10,000 or more

Original amount 18,362,014 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 4 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