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.

5cases from 1 jurisdiction
€1.33bnTotal of monetary amounts
€462.6mLargest single case: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (Teva-Gruppe)
€329mMedian 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 20231€13.4m
Q1 20240—
Q2 20240—
Q3 20240—
Q4 20241€462.6m
Q1 20250—
Q2 20252€787m
Q3 20250—
Q4 20251€72m
Q1 20260—
Q2 20260—
Q3 20260—

5 cases

15 Dec 2025 Exide, FET (inkl. Elettra), Rombat, EUROBAT (Clarios Kronzeuge)EU: 72 million EUR against starter battery manufacturers and the association EUROBAT EU levelCartels and collusion €72m

From 2005 to 2017, the manufacturers of automotive starter batteries agreed, with the help of the association EUROBAT, to publish jointly calculated lead surcharges (EUROBAT premiums) and to use them in price negotiations with carmakers. Fines: Exide 30 million EUR, Rombat 20.218 million EUR, Elettra 15.594 million EUR, FET 6.11 million EUR, EUROBAT 125,000 EUR; Clarios escaped a fine as leniency applicant.

What organisations can take from it

Suppliers may pass on raw material surcharges individually, but must never fix them in an industry-wide coordinated manner via association indices.

Relevance to training and awareness

Joint raw material surcharges among competitors via association indices

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
Automotive
Mitigating circumstances
Leniency programme (Clarios 100 %, FET 50 %, Rombat 30 %); reduction for inability to pay for one company; payment in instalments

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.

2 Jun 2025 Delivery Hero SE, Glovoapp23 SAEU: 329 million EUR against Delivery Hero and Glovo – first labour market cartel EU levelCartels and collusion €329m

From July 2018 to July 2022, Delivery Hero and Glovo agreed a mutual no-poach arrangement, exchanged commercially sensitive information and allocated national markets; this was facilitated by Delivery Hero's minority stake in Glovo. Fines: Delivery Hero 223.285 million EUR, Glovo 105.732 million EUR (settlement procedure, 10 % reduction).

What organisations can take from it

No-poach clauses and information flows from stakes in competitors are high-risk under competition law and must be shielded by clean-team rules.

Relevance to training and awareness

No-poach agreements and information exchange via minority stakes

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
Retail and e-commerce
Employees
10,000 or more
Mitigating circumstances
Settlement procedure (10 % reduction)

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.

1 Apr 2025 BMW, Ford, Honda, Hyundai/Kia, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Opel/GM, Renault/Nissan, Stellantis, Suzuki, Toyota, Volkswagen, Volvo, ACEA (Mercedes-Benz Kronzeuge)EU: 458 million EUR against carmakers and ACEA over end-of-life vehicle recycling cartel EU levelCartels and collusion €457.9m

The Commission imposed fines of around 458 million EUR on 15 carmakers and the association ACEA. From 2002 to 2017, they had agreed not to pay dismantlers for recycling end-of-life vehicles and not to advertise recycling rates or recycled content; ACEA organised the meetings. Mercedes-Benz received full immunity as leniency applicant, and all parties reached a settlement (10 % reduction).

What organisations can take from it

Agreements on purchasing terms or on refraining from advertising claims are also cartels – association meetings require antitrust supervision.

Relevance to training and awareness

Agreements in association bodies; refraining from purchasing or advertising can also be a cartel

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
Automotive
Employees
10,000 or more
Mitigating circumstances
Leniency programme (Mercedes-Benz 100 %, Stellantis/Opel 50 %, Mitsubishi 30 %, Ford 20 %), 10 % settlement reduction, lesser involvement of Honda, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Suzuki

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.

31 Oct 2024 Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (Teva-Gruppe)EU: 462.6 million EUR against Teva for patent misuse and disparaging a competing medicine EU levelAbuse of market power €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.

What organisations can take from it

Communications by sales representatives and medical affairs about competing products must be substantiated and objective; patent strategies of dominant companies require competition law review.

Relevance to training and awareness

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

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.

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) EU levelCartels and collusion €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.

What organisations can take from it

Even small niche markets for active ingredients are in the spotlight – contacts with competitors about prices or volumes are off-limits.

Relevance to training and awareness

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

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