Compliance Radar

Who was sanctioned, and for what?

Fines, court rulings and incidents from Europe and North America: 756 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.

2cases from 1 jurisdiction
€70.1mTotal of monetary amounts
€35.1mMedian per case with an amount

Click a bar to drill down one level.

Where?

by country
  1. Austria €70.1m 100 % · 2 cases

What for?

by action
  1. Fine €70.1m 100 % · 2 cases

Who?

by sector

All sectors

  1. Retail and e-commerce €70m 100 % · 1 case
  2. Other €100,000 0 % · 1 case

When?

per quarter, by date of decision
Trend
PeriodCasesTotal
Q3 20230—
Q4 20230—
Q1 20240—
Q2 20240—
Q3 20240—
Q4 20241€100,000
Q1 20251€70m
Q2 20250—
Q3 20250—
Q4 20250—
Q1 20260—
Q2 20260—
Q3 20260—

2 cases

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.

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.

Ready for training that sticks?

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

Start free trial