Compliance Radar
Who was sanctioned, and for what?
Fines, court rulings and incidents from Europe, North America, Latin America, Asia-Pacific, Middle East and Africa: 2,207 cases from 44 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 authority- Competition Tribunal (Hongkong), auf Antrag der Competition Commission €3.43m 100 % · 2 cases
- Competition Commission (Hongkong) – 0 % · 3 cases
What for?
by topic- Cartels and collusion €3.43m 100 % · 2 cases
- no topic – 0 % · 3 cases
Who?
by sectorAll sectors
When?
per year, by date of decision| Period | Cases | Total |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 1 | – |
| 2023 | 2 | €659,106 |
| 2024 | 0 | – |
| 2025 | 1 | €2.77m |
| 2026 | 1 | – |
5 cases
17 Jun 2026 Kangaroo Limited (Keeta)Keeta gives binding commitment to open up its restaurant contracts Order
On 17 June 2026 the Competition Commission (Hong Kong's competition authority) accepted a commitment from Kangaroo Limited, which operates the Keeta food delivery platform in Hong Kong and is a subsidiary of Meituan. The authority was concerned that clauses in Keeta's agreements with partner restaurants made access harder for new and small platforms and softened competition – a possible breach of the First Conduct Rule (the ban on anti-competitive agreements). Keeta had already amended the agreements voluntarily (cooperation with platforms of up to 10% market share without losing incentives, easier switching, no bar on lower prices on the restaurants' own channels and on rival platforms); with the acceptance, these changes are legally binding and enforceable by the authority until 28 December 2026.
Platforms should proactively align their exclusivity and price parity clauses with the standards the authority has already imposed on their competitors.
Exclusivity and price parity clauses of online platforms
- Authority / court
- Competition Commission (Hongkong)
- Area of law
- Competition law
- Legal basis
- Competition Ordinance (Cap. 619), s. 6 (First Conduct Rule); Annahme einer Verpflichtungszusage nach s. 60
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Media and online platforms
- Published
- 17 Jun 2026
- Competition Commission: Competition Commission accepts commitment offered by Keeta (17.06.2026) Press release of an authority
- Competition Commission: Notice regarding the Commission's acceptance of a commitment from Keeta in the Online Food Delivery Platform case (EC/12LD), 17.06.2026 Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
20 Jan 2025 Hong Kong Commercial Cleaning Services Limited, Man Shun Hong Kong & Kln Cleaning Company LimitedCleaning cartel in public housing tenders: company penalties of 22.26 million HKD €2.77m
In January 2025 the Competition Tribunal (Hong Kong's specialist competition court) imposed allegedly agreed penalties on two cleaning companies that, from at least May 2016 to August 2018, exchanged confidential bid information in 17 tenders of the Hong Kong Housing Authority (the public housing authority) for cleaning services at public housing estates (contract value around 180 million HKD) – price fixing under the First Conduct Rule (the ban on anti-competitive agreements); the case came to light through a complaint from a group that included cleaners at a housing estate. Hong Kong Commercial Cleaning Services Limited received 10,960,000 HKD, and Man Shun Hong Kong & Kln Cleaning Company Limited received 11,300,000 HKD on 20 January 2025. The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.
Where competitors share offices, servers or staff, strict information barriers are needed – otherwise the exchange of bid data becomes a cartel.
Information exchange between competitors in public tenders
- 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. 91 (Beteiligung), s. 93(1) (pecuniary penalty), ss. 101–102 (Disqualifikation)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Other
- Mitigating circumstances
- Cooperation discount of 9% for Hong Kong Commercial Cleaning (admission only after the trial dates had been fixed, less than five months before trial); for Man Shun a cooperation discount of 15% (admission before any witness statements were filed) and a further 20% reduction because the full penalty would have undermined its viability; payment in four and eight quarterly instalments respectively.
- Liability of senior managers
- Measures against individuals are not set out here.
- Published
- 20 Jan 2025
Original amount 22,260,000 HKD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 20 Jan 2025.
- Competition Tribunal: Competition Commission v. Hong Kong Commercial Cleaning Services Ltd and Others, CTEA 2/2021, [2025] HKCT 1, Reasons for Judgment 14.02.2025 Court decision
- Competition Commission: Competition Commission welcomes Tribunal's orders in cleansing service cartel case (20.01.2025) Press release of an authority
- Competition Commission: Hong Kong Commercial Cleaning Services admits liability and agrees to over HK$10 million penalty (09.12.2024) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
29 Dec 2023 two Hong Kong food delivery platformsTwo food delivery platforms loosen exclusivity ties with partner restaurants Order
On 29 December 2023 the Competition Commission (Hong Kong's competition authority) accepted commitments from two food delivery platforms – the Hong Kong company of the first platform and the Hong Kong company of the second platform together with its parent company. Their agreements with partner restaurants contained exclusivity and pricing clauses which, in the authority's view, made it harder for new or small platforms to enter the market and could therefore breach the First Conduct Rule (the ban on anti-competitive agreements). The platforms must allow restaurants to work with platforms of up to 10% market share without losing the benefits granted to exclusive partners (such as lower commission rates), make switching easier and remove clauses that prohibit lower prices on the restaurants' own channels (and, for the first platform, on rival platforms); the first platform also drops the tie to its pick-up service, and the commitments run for three years.
Exclusivity and parity clauses used by platforms with market power are under competition-law scrutiny and should be reviewed regularly.
Exclusivity and price parity clauses of online platforms
- Authority / court
- Competition Commission (Hongkong)
- Area of law
- Competition law
- Legal basis
- Competition Ordinance (Cap. 619), s. 6(1) (First Conduct Rule); Annahme von Verpflichtungszusagen nach s. 60
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Media and online platforms
- Published
- 29 Dec 2023
- Competition Commission (Hongkong), Veröffentlichung der Behörde (Entscheidung 2023) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 29 Dec 2025 · Direct link
Report an error
14 Jun 2023 three Hong Kong mail inserter suppliersMail inserter cartel: Tribunal imposes 5,579,000 HKD on three suppliers €659,106
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.
Disclosing a cartel early and cooperating with the authority substantially reduces the penalty and can shield a company's own employees from personal enforcement action.
Price fixing, market sharing and bid rigging in sales
- 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
Report an error
10 Oct 2022 seven Hong Kong car distributorsHong Kong: seven car distributors drop repair-shop tie-in from warranties Order
On 10 October 2022 the Competition Commission (Hong Kong's competition authority) accepted commitments from seven sole distributors covering 17 passenger car brands. Their warranty terms required maintenance and repairs – including work not covered by the warranty – to be carried out at authorised repair centres, failing which the warranty was at risk; the authority considered this a possible breach of the First Conduct Rule (the ban on anti-competitive agreements) to the detriment of independent workshops. The distributors no longer enforce these clauses, will remove them from their warranty documents within 90 days, will inform existing customers and are bound for five years; no fine was imposed.
Warranty and distribution clauses that in practice tie customers to authorised workshops should be tested against competition law before they are used.
Competition law in distribution and warranty terms: workshop tie-ins
- Authority / court
- Competition Commission (Hongkong)
- Area of law
- Competition law
- Legal basis
- Competition Ordinance (Cap. 619), s. 6(1) (First Conduct Rule); Annahme von Verpflichtungszusagen nach s. 60
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Automotive
- Published
- 10 Oct 2022
- Competition Commission (Hongkong), Veröffentlichung der Behörde (Entscheidung 2022) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 10 Oct 2024 · Direct link