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.

EUCompetition law Clear all filters
82cases from 20 jurisdictions
€2.73bnTotal of monetary amounts (78 cases with an amount)
€462.6mLargest single case: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (Teva-Gruppe)
€1.55mMedian 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 20234€18.3m
Q1 20242€5.02m
Q2 20241€34,490
Q3 20243€434.9m
Q4 20248€468.2m
Q1 20253€73.5m
Q2 202510€815.4m
Q3 20255€6.96m
Q4 202515€615.8m
Q1 20269€123.5m
Q2 20269€61.7m
Q3 202613€106.1m

82 cases

24 Sep 2026 Plaček Pet Products s.r.o.Plaček Pet Products: 36.4 million CZK for minimum prices on pet food CzechiaCartels and collusion €1.49m

From January 2013 to March 2022, the distributor of premium pet food and pet supplies imposed minimum resale prices on its retailers and threatened sanctions if they were undercut. In a settlement procedure, the Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže (Czech Office for the Protection of Competition, ÚOHS) imposed 36.438 million CZK; the company ended the conduct after the inspection and introduced a compliance programme.

What organisations can take from it

Never enforce recommended retail prices with supply stops or sanctions – sales teams need clear rules on this.

Relevance to training and awareness

Price requirements imposed on retailers in sales

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže (ÚOHS)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Verbot vertikaler Preisbindung (tschechisches Wettbewerbsgesetz, Art. 101 AEUV)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Culpability
intentional
Mitigating circumstances
Termination immediately after the inspection, information of customers about free pricing, full cooperation, settlement and newly introduced compliance programme.
Published
24 Sep 2026

Original amount 36,438,000 CZK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 24 Sep 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.

17 Sep 2026 Lesy České republiky, s.p. (Lesy ČR)Lesy ČR: 17.3 million CZK for export ban on wood chips CzechiaCartels and collusion €710,383

From July 2021 to July 2024, the state forestry company contractually prohibited a customer from actively and passively exporting wood chips and logging residues and secured the ban with a right of termination. The Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže (Czech Office for the Protection of Competition, ÚOHS) considered this a restriction of competition by object under Czech and EU law and imposed 17.268 million CZK (first instance, not final).

What organisations can take from it

State-owned companies are also subject to competition law – have export and resale bans in framework agreements legally reviewed before signing.

Relevance to training and awareness

Anticompetitive clauses in supply contracts

Authority / court
Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže (ÚOHS)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Tschechisches Wettbewerbsgesetz, Art. 101 AEUV (Exportverbot, S0733/2025)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Food and agriculture
Mitigating circumstances
Voluntary termination immediately after proceedings were opened.
Published
17 Sep 2026

Original amount 17,268,000 CZK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 Sep 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.

26 Aug 2026 O2 Czech Republic a.s.; SHERLOG Technology, a.s.O2 Czech Republic and SHERLOG: 280 million CZK for customer allocation in vehicle tracking CzechiaCartels and collusion €11.7m

From December 2012 to June 2022, the two companies allocated customers for vehicle tracking and electronic logbook services between themselves and coordinated bids, including in public tenders. At first instance, the Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže (Czech Office for the Protection of Competition, ÚOHS) fined O2 262.32 million CZK and SHERLOG 18.357 million CZK and imposed a six-month ban on public contracts; for O2, the fine was increased instead of a procurement ban.

What organisations can take from it

Do not let sales cooperation with competitors turn into customer allocation – e-mail arrangements about individual tenders are the typical evidence.

Relevance to training and awareness

Coordination with cooperation partners on customers and tenders

Authority / court
Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže (ÚOHS)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Tschechisches Wettbewerbsgesetz, Art. 101 AEUV (S0255/2023)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Telecoms, IT and software
Culpability
intentional
Published
26 Aug 2026

Original amount 280,677,000 CZK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 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.

26 Aug 2026 Wolt DenmarkWolt: Competition Council finds abuse of dominant position vis-à-vis restaurants DenmarkAbuse of market power Order

In 2022–2024, the delivery service used a standard clause to prohibit restaurants from being cheaper on their own channels than on Wolt, while at the same time being able to grant discounts without consultation and to compensate customers up to 400 DKK at the restaurants’ expense. The Konkurrencerådet (Danish Competition Council) ordered the practice to cease, required Wolt to inform all restaurants and intends to enforce a fine through the courts.

What organisations can take from it

Platforms with a high market share should have parity clauses and unilateral cost shifting in standard terms reviewed under competition law.

Authority / court
Konkurrencerådet (Danish Competition Council)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Konkurrenceloven; AEUV Art. 102
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Media and online platforms
Published
26 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.

25 Aug 2026 Elizabeta Promet d.o.o., SolinCroatia: 10,000 EUR against Elizabeta Promet for deliveries without a written contract CroatiaAbuse of market power €10,000

As a buyer with significant bargaining power, the company from Solin purchased agricultural and food products from two suppliers without written contracts. The Agencija za zaštitu tržišnog natjecanja (Croatian Competition Agency, AZTN) considered this an unfair trading practice and, taking mitigating circumstances into account, imposed 10,000 EUR (date = publication).

What organisations can take from it

In food purchasing, the mere absence of written supply contracts is an infringement – a simple contract standard prevents this.

Relevance to training and awareness

Written form for supply contracts in food purchasing

Authority / court
Agencija za zaštitu tržišnog natjecanja (AZTN)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Zakon o zabrani nepoštenih trgovačkih praksi u lancu opskrbe hranom (ZNTP)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Food and agriculture
Mitigating circumstances
Several mitigating circumstances taken into account
Published
25 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.

17 Aug 2026 Pluxee Česká republika a.s.; Edenred CZ s.r.o.; Up Česká republika s.r.o.Meal voucher cartel: 279 million CZK against Pluxee, Edenred and Up upheld with final effect CzechiaCartels and collusion €11.5m

From 2004 to 2018, the three issuers of paper meal vouchers coordinated with retail chains how many vouchers would be accepted per purchase. The President of the Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže (Czech Office for the Protection of Competition, ÚOHS) dismissed the appeals against the recalculation of the fines: Pluxee 132.271 million, Edenred 101.94 million and Up 44.941 million CZK, a total of 279.152 million CZK.

What organisations can take from it

Coordinating seemingly technical conditions such as acceptance limits is also a cartel – industry discussions need clear boundaries.

Relevance to training and awareness

Coordination of terms and conditions among competitors

Authority / court
Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže (ÚOHS)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Tschechisches Wettbewerbsgesetz, Art. 101 AEUV (R0112/2025)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Culpability
intentional
Published
17 Aug 2026

Original amount 279,152,000 CZK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 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.

13 Aug 2026 „О-Рент“ ЕООД (sowie „Инжконсулт“ ЕООД und „Земекоп“ ЕООД)Construction machinery cartel: fine for O-Rent, compliance programme for all participants BulgariaCartels and collusion €2,403

The Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (Bulgarian Commission for the Protection of Competition, KZK) found a cartel in public tenders for mining and construction machinery (price fixing and market sharing, Art. 15 ZZK – Bulgarian Protection of Competition Act, Art. 101 TFEU). Inzhkonsult and Zemekop, as a single undertaking, were exempted from the fine; O-Rent received a sanction of 2,403.07 EUR. All three companies must introduce a competition law compliance programme within 60 days and report on it.

What organisations can take from it

The authority now expressly requires compliance programmes – anyone bidding in tenders should have one before it is ordered.

Relevance to training and awareness

Competition law in tenders; compliance programme

Authority / court
Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (КЗК, Bulgarische Wettbewerbskommission)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 15 Abs. 1 Nr. 1 und 2 ZZK; Art. 101 Abs. 1 lit. a und c AEUV
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Mitigating circumstances
Immunity from fines for two participants (leniency programme)
Published
20 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.

7 Aug 2026 Hair-Line Kft.Hair-Line: 68.5 million HUF for price and territorial restrictions on hairdressing supplies HungaryCartels and collusion €187,929

In 2018–2022, the distributor of professional hairdressing products (Alfaparf, Yellow) determined the prices at which its territorial representatives were allowed to sell to salons and retailers and restricted passive sales outside the territories. Under a settlement and with a commitment to a compliance programme, the Gazdasági Versenyhivatal (Hungarian Competition Authority, GVH) imposed 68.5 million HUF.

What organisations can take from it

Commercial agent systems with territorial protection must not restrict resale prices or passive sales either.

Relevance to training and awareness

Price and territorial restrictions in the distribution system

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Gazdasági Versenyhivatal (GVH)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Ungarisches Wettbewerbsgesetz, Verbot wettbewerbsbeschränkender Vereinbarungen (VJ/17/2022)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Culpability
intentional
Mitigating circumstances
Cooperation, acknowledgement in the settlement and commitment to a comprehensive compliance programme.
Published
7 Aug 2026

Original amount 68,500,000 HUF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 7 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.

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.

6 Aug 2026 „Чили Хилс Фудс“ ООД (Chili Hills Foods OOD)Chili Hills Foods: 20,022 EUR for false copying allegations against competitor BulgariaCompetition law €20,022

From May 2024, in social media videos (campaign ‘Създавай! Не копирай!’), the company falsely accused a competing family business for hot chillies of having stolen its business, ideas and concept, and promoted the clips partly through paid advertising. The Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (Bulgarian Commission for the Protection of Competition, KZK) regarded this as unfair damage to reputation (Art. 30 ZZK – Bulgarian Protection of Competition Act), imposed 4% of 2025 net turnover (500,555 EUR), i.e. 20,022 EUR, and ordered immediate cessation. Appeals have been lodged against the decision.

What organisations can take from it

Allegations against competitors on social media are only permissible if based on verifiable facts – paid reach aggravates the sanction.

Relevance to training and awareness

Statements about competitors on social media

Authority / court
Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (КЗК, Bulgarische Wettbewerbskommission)
Area of law
Competition law
Legal basis
Art. 30 ZZK (Schädigung des guten Rufs eines Wettbewerbers)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
under appeal
Sector
Food and agriculture
Published
19 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.

4 Aug 2026 AS "Latvijas valsts meži"7.86 million EUR against Latvijas valsts meži for breach of competitive neutrality LatviaCompetition law €7.86m

From 2020 to April 2026, on the basis of old long-term logging contracts, the state forestry group supplied six wood processors with guaranteed quantities of roundwood outside public auctions, while all others could only buy through auctions. In its first decision on the competitive neutrality of public undertakings, the Konkurences padome (Latvian Competition Council) imposed 7,859,606.89 EUR and required equal sales conditions for all qualified bidders.

What organisations can take from it

State-owned companies must allocate resources without discrimination – review historical special contracts regularly for competitive neutrality.

Authority / court
Konkurences padome (Lettischer Wettbewerbsrat)
Area of law
Competition law
Legal basis
Art. 14.1 Konkurences likums (Wettbewerbsneutralität)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector
Published
13 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 Jun 2026 Самостоятелна медико-диагностична лаборатория „Лина“ ЕООДLaboratory Lina lures customers with free blood tests – 52,097 EUR for unfair competition BulgariaCompetition law €52,097

On application by its competitor Ramus, the Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (Bulgarian Commission for the Protection of Competition, KZK) established that the laboratory had offered packages of medical laboratory tests free of charge nationwide over extended periods (only against a fee of 2 leva for taking blood) – conduct shown by no other market participant outside joint campaigns. It found an infringement of the general clause of unfair competition law (Art. 29 ZZK – Bulgarian Protection of Competition Act) and imposed 0.3% of 2024 turnover, i.e. 52,096.55 EUR. Appeals have been lodged against the decision.

What organisations can take from it

Permanent free offers to win customers can be unfair if they deviate significantly from market practice and drive out competitors.

Authority / court
Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (КЗК, Bulgarische Wettbewerbskommission)
Area of law
Competition law
Legal basis
Art. 29 ZZK (Generalklausel unlauterer Wettbewerb)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
under appeal
Sector
Healthcare
Published
2 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.

24 Jun 2026 Kaufland Hrvatska k.d.Croatia: 300,000 EUR against Kaufland for unfair practices towards suppliers CroatiaAbuse of market power €300,000

The Agencija za zaštitu tržišnog natjecanja (Croatian Competition Agency, AZTN) found that Kaufland Hrvatska charged food suppliers fees for services not provided and for advertising not commissioned, and paid for perishable goods only after more than 30 days. For these unfair trading practices, and with repeat offending as an aggravating factor (final penalty already in 2020), it imposed 300,000 EUR (date = publication).

What organisations can take from it

Purchasing departments must know the payment deadlines and fee prohibitions of UTP law – repeat offences become significantly more expensive.

Relevance to training and awareness

Fair terms towards suppliers in purchasing

Authority / court
Agencija za zaštitu tržišnog natjecanja (AZTN)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Art. 4, 11, 12 Zakon o zabrani nepoštenih trgovačkih praksi u lancu opskrbe hranom (ZNTP)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Repeat case
yes
Published
24 Jun 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.

5 Jun 2026 Portugal: 8.18 million EUR against three companies over advertising in TV recordings PortugalCartels and collusion €8.18m

With the support of a consultancy, the three largest pay-TV providers agreed from 2019 to May 2025 to introduce advertising as a condition for accessing recordings and to standardise the marketing of this advertising space. The Autoridade da Concorrência (Portuguese Competition Authority, AdC) imposed 8,181,000 EUR on three companies; together with the fourth participant, already sanctioned earlier under a settlement, the fines add up to 13,351,000 EUR. Owing to ongoing court proceedings, the AdC did not publish the names in its announcement.

What organisations can take from it

Jointly coordinated ‘industry solutions’ at customers’ expense are cartels – even when a service provider takes on the coordination.

Relevance to training and awareness

Coordinated product changes among competitors

Authority / court
Autoridade da Concorrência (AdC)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Lei da Concorrência (Lei n.º 19/2012), Art. 9.º (Processo PRC/2020/4)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Telecoms, IT and software
Published
5 Jun 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.

3 Jun 2026 VF Hellas Ενδυμάτων Ε.Π.Ε. (VF Hellas, Tochter der VF Corporation)Greece: 954,485 EUR against VF Hellas for banning price comparison and Google Ads GreeceCartels and collusion €954,485

The importer and wholesaler of the Vans, Eastpak and The North Face brands contractually prohibited its retailers from using price comparison portals and search engine advertising (in particular Google Ads). The Επιτροπή Ανταγωνισμού (Hellenic Competition Commission) regarded this as a hardcore restriction in online sales and, in a settlement procedure (Decision 913/2026), set a reduced fine of 954,485 EUR; date = press release.

What organisations can take from it

Prohibiting retailers from using price comparison sites or search engine advertising is a hardcore restriction – distribution agreements should regularly undergo competition law review.

Relevance to training and awareness

Competition-law-compliant design of dealer agreements in online sales

Authority / court
Επιτροπή Ανταγωνισμού (Hellenic Competition Commission)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 1 Gesetz 3959/2011; Art. 101 AEUV; Art. 4 lit. e VO (EU) 2022/720
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Mitigating circumstances
Settlement procedure (Diettheti Diaforon) with fine reduction
Published
3 Jun 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.

6 May 2026 HP TRONIC Zlín, spol. s r.o.HP TRONIC Zlín: 39 million CZK for price requirements imposed on electronics retailers CzechiaCartels and collusion €1.6m

For more than ten years from 2012, the distributor and retailer of consumer electronics and household appliances set minimum resale prices for its retail customers, monitored them and sanctioned deviations. The Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže (Czech Office for the Protection of Competition, ÚOHS) imposed 38.971 million CZK; a leniency application, settlement and an improved compliance programme reduced the fine, and the company appealed against the amount.

What organisations can take from it

Reprimanding retailers over low prices risks high fines – an effective compliance programme can reduce them but is no substitute for ending the practice.

Relevance to training and awareness

Resale price maintenance in sales

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže (ÚOHS)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Tschechisches Wettbewerbsgesetz, Art. 101 AEUV (S0551/2023)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
under appeal
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Culpability
intentional
Mitigating circumstances
Leniency application, settlement and expansion of the internal compliance programme.
Published
6 May 2026

Original amount 38,971,000 CZK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 6 May 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.

30 Apr 2026 „Вазовски машиностроителни заводи“ ЕАД (VMZ)Arms manufacturer VMZ used a partner’s know-how for disposable grenade launchers – 50,855 EUR BulgariaCompetition law €50,855

On application by the client Armar, the Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (Bulgarian Commission for the Protection of Competition, KZK) found that VMZ had used technical documentation on disposable grenade launchers that had been provided in confidence (trade secret) contrary to the confidentiality agreements and good commercial practice (Art. 37(1) ZZK – Bulgarian Protection of Competition Act). Sanction of 50,855.09 EUR and obligation to cease, with immediate enforceability. Appeals have been lodged against the decision.

What organisations can take from it

Design documents provided in confidence may only be used within the agreed scope – especially in sensitive industries.

Relevance to training and awareness

Handling confidential know-how of business partners

Authority / court
Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (КЗК, Bulgarische Wettbewerbskommission)
Area of law
Competition law
Legal basis
Art. 37 Abs. 1 ZZK (Geschäftsgeheimnisse)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
under appeal
Sector
Defence and security

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 Apr 2026 Amica Chips S.p.A., Pata S.p.A., Preziosi Food S.p.A.Italy: 23.3 million EUR against Amica Chips, Pata and Preziosi Food over snack cartel ItalyCartels and collusion €23.3m

In a secret, continuing agreement, three manufacturers of salty snacks and crisps divided up among themselves the supply of private-label snacks to food retailers. Fines: Amica Chips 8,239,210 EUR, Pata 7,555,387 EUR, Preziosi Food 7,503,550 EUR; this was the first time Italy's competition authority (Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato, AGCM) applied its settlement procedure.

What organisations can take from it

Retailers' tenders for private labels are competition – coordinated sham bids to retailers constitute a cartel.

Relevance to training and awareness

Sham bids in retailers' private-label tenders

Authority / court
Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 101 AEUV; Art. 14-quater Gesetz 287/1990 (Settlement)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Food and agriculture
Mitigating circumstances
Leniency reduction for Pata and Amica Chips; 10 % settlement discount for all
Published
28 Apr 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.

17 Apr 2026 Medirex s. r. o.; KLINICKÁ BIOCHÉMIA s.r.o.; Unilabs Slovensko, s. r. o.; synlab slovakia s. r. o.; Asociácia laboratóriíLaboratory cartel: 14.6 million EUR and procurement bans against diagnostic laboratories SlovakiaCartels and collusion €14.6m

Four laboratories and their association coordinated negotiations on prices with health insurers, coordinated in tenders, exchanged sensitive information and allocated customers. At first instance, the Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (Antimonopoly Office of the Slovak Republic, PMÚ SR) imposed 14,551,800 EUR and three-year procurement bans; Unilabs received a substantially reduced fine as leniency applicant and under a settlement.

What organisations can take from it

Common negotiating positions towards payers via an association are a cartel – association meetings need minutes and a review of the agenda.

Relevance to training and awareness

Information exchange among competitors and association work

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
Healthcare
Culpability
intentional
Mitigating circumstances
Unilabs: leniency reduction (50%) and settlement (a further 30%).
Published
12 May 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.

16 Apr 2026 Synadis Bio, Greenweez (mit Carrefour SA), ITM Entreprises (mit Les Mousquetaires), Les Comptoirs de la BioFrance: 12.67 million EUR over allocation of distribution channels for organic food FranceCartels and collusion €12.7m

Through the association Synadis Bio, market participants ensured for more than seven years that organic brands were not sold simultaneously in specialist organic shops and in conventional supermarkets, in order to prevent price comparisons (decision 26-D-05). Fines: Synadis Bio 10 million EUR, Greenweez/Carrefour 1.85 million EUR, ITM 740,000 EUR, Les Comptoirs de la Bio 80,000 EUR.

What organisations can take from it

Association decisions that tie members to particular distribution channels amount to market sharing – even if they are justified as a quality or positioning policy.

Relevance to training and awareness

Association rules to foreclose distribution channels

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; Bußgeldbemessung nach Art. L.464-2 Code de commerce
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
under appeal
Sector
Food and agriculture
Published
16 Apr 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.

12 Mar 2026 Associação Portuguesa das Empresas do Setor Privado de Emprego e de Recursos Humanos (APESPE)Portugal: 4.5 million EUR against temporary work association APESPE for no-poach rule PortugalCartels and collusion €4.52m

From 1987 to March 2025, the association of temporary work agencies (around 40 members) obliged its members in its code of ethics not to poach each other’s temporary workers. The Autoridade da Concorrência (Portuguese Competition Authority, AdC) regarded this as an anticompetitive decision by an association in the labour market and imposed 4,519,000 EUR, calculated on the basis of the members’ turnover; the decision can be appealed (date = press release).

What organisations can take from it

An association’s code of ethics can also be a cartel – no-poach agreements between competitors are off limits.

Relevance to training and awareness

No-poach agreements in association rules

Authority / court
Autoridade da Concorrência (AdC)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Lei da Concorrência (Lei n.º 19/2012), Art. 9.º
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other
Published
12 Mar 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.

6 Mar 2026 ΚΟΜΠΑ Μονοπρόσωπη Ε.Π.Ε. und HAPPY DOG Α.Ε. ΖωοτροφώνGreece: around 482,500 EUR against pet food importers for resale price maintenance GreeceCartels and collusion €482,498

Two importers of dog and cat food monitored their retailers’ consumer prices on price comparison portals and asked them to adjust them to their price lists; the retailers complied. In a settlement procedure (Decision 901/2026), the Επιτροπή Ανταγωνισμού (Hellenic Competition Commission) imposed 387,498 EUR on KOMPA and 95,000 EUR on Happy Dog; the case began with a tip-off via the authority’s anonymous whistleblowing platform.

What organisations can take from it

Recommended prices must not be enforced through monitoring and calls to retailers – and authorities’ whistleblowing channels make such practices visible.

Relevance to training and awareness

Prohibition of resale price maintenance in sales

Authority / court
Επιτροπή Ανταγωνισμού (Hellenic Competition Commission)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 1 Gesetz 3959/2011; Art. 101 AEUV
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Mitigating circumstances
Settlement procedure with reduced fines
Published
6 Mar 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.

5 Mar 2026 SIA "SS"Classifieds portal ss.lv blocked users of competitor – fine of 186,781 EUR LatviaAbuse of market power €186,781

From March 2020 to May 2021, the operator of ss.lv/ss.com (market share over 60%) deleted advertisements and blocked accounts of users – mainly car dealers and estate agents – who also advertised on the competing platform pp.lv; anyone wishing to register with an inbox.lv address additionally had to provide a different e-mail address. The Konkurences padome (Latvian Competition Council) considered this an abuse of a dominant position (Art. 102 TFEU), imposed 186,780.65 EUR and required objective criteria for dealing with customers.

What organisations can take from it

Market-leading platforms must not punish users for multi-homing – internal moderation rules need objective criteria.

Relevance to training and awareness

Competition law limits in dealing with competitors’ customers

Authority / court
Konkurences padome (Lettischer Wettbewerbsrat)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Art. 102 AEUV
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Media and online platforms
Published
18 Mar 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.

12 Feb 2026 ELKOND HHK, VUKI, Prysmian, NKT, KABEX u. a. (Kabelkartell, 9 Unternehmen und ein Verband)Cable cartel: PMÚ imposes record fines of 97.4 million EUR SlovakiaCartels and collusion €97.4m

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).

What organisations can take from it

A coordinated calculation formula for price components is also price fixing – association work needs competition law support.

Relevance to training and awareness

Price coordination via associations and surcharge formulas

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

Report an error

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

12 Feb 2026 DPG Media nv; Mediahuis nv; PPP Belgium bv; bpost nv (Kronzeuge)Press concession: 11.9 million EUR for collusion in newspaper delivery tender BelgiumCartels and collusion €11.9m

So that bpost would obtain the state concession for newspaper delivery for 2023–2027, its competitor PPP refrained from submitting a bid and in return received additional delivery volumes from DPG Media and Mediahuis (bid rigging). In a settlement procedure, the Autorité belge de la Concurrence / Belgische Mededingingsautoriteit (Belgian Competition Authority, BMA) imposed 3,786,574 EUR (DPG Media), 7,788,423 EUR (Mediahuis) and 323,486 EUR (PPP); bpost, as leniency applicant, received full immunity, and two bpost employees involved were fined a total of 6,300 EUR.

What organisations can take from it

Agreements on who participates in a tender are hardcore cartels – individuals are also liable, and leniency applicants benefit.

Relevance to training and awareness

Collusion in public tenders

Authority / court
Autorité belge de la Concurrence / Belgische Mededingingsautoriteit (BMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Code de droit économique Art. IV.1; AEUV Art. 101
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Media and online platforms
Mitigating circumstances
Leniency programme (immunity for bpost; reductions of 50% and 40% for DPG Media and Mediahuis respectively) and 10% settlement reduction.
Liability of senior managers
First-ever fines against two natural persons (employed by bpost), totalling 6,300 EUR.
Published
13 Feb 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.

12 Feb 2026 UAB „Manado“, MB „Parts ready“Manado and Parts ready: cartel in Vilnius public transport spare parts tender LithuaniaCartels and collusion €41,080

In two tenders by ‘Vilniaus viešasis transportas’ for vehicle spare parts (May–October 2025), the dealers coordinated bids and prices, wrote the bids for each other and sent them from the same computer. The contracting entity reported the suspicion. Following acknowledgement (minus 15%), fines of 17,950 EUR (Manado) and 23,130 EUR (Parts ready). Source: archived copy of the press release.

What organisations can take from it

Even jointly prepared bids by small dealers are a cartel – and contracting entities increasingly recognise such patterns.

Relevance to training and awareness

Competition law in tenders

Authority / court
Konkurencijos taryba (Litauischer Wettbewerbsrat)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Konkurencijos įstatymas (verbotene Vereinbarungen)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Automotive
Mitigating circumstances
Acknowledgement of the infringement (15% reduction)
Published
12 Feb 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.

29 Jan 2026 RASEMA s.r.o.; M – D – J, spol. s.r.o.; SIMA plus Krompachy, s.r.o.; BarCom spol. s.r.o.Photovoltaic tender: 1.1 million EUR – the contracting entity was also a cartel member SlovakiaCartels and collusion €1.1m

In a tender for industrial photovoltaic installations that was to be financed from EU Structural Funds, three bidders coordinated their bids so that a pre-selected bidder would win; the contracting entity BarCom acted as facilitator. The Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (Antimonopoly Office of the Slovak Republic, PMÚ SR) imposed a total of 1,098,200 EUR and three-year procurement bans on all four; the EU funding was refused because of the indications of competition infringements, and the collusion was proven by e-mails secured during the inspection.

What organisations can take from it

A contracting entity that determines the winner of a funded tender in advance is itself liable under competition law and additionally risks losing the funding.

Relevance to training and awareness

Collusion in funded procurement

Authority / court
Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (PMÚ SR)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Slowakisches Wettbewerbsschutzgesetz (Submissionsabsprache)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Culpability
intentional
Published
11 Feb 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.

29 Jan 2026 Associação de Guias de Informação Turística dos Açores (AGITA)Portugal: 8,200 EUR against Azores tour guide association for minimum price list PortugalCartels and collusion €8,200

Since 2020, the only association of tour guides in the Azores (57 active members, around 43% of active guides) had recommended a fee table to its members by e-mail as minimum prices. Following a complaint, the Autoridade da Concorrência (Portuguese Competition Authority, AdC) imposed 8,200 EUR, taking the economic situation into account (date = press release).

What organisations can take from it

Even small professional associations must not circulate fee tables as minimum prices – an e-mail is sufficient evidence.

Relevance to training and awareness

No price recommendations by professional associations

Authority / court
Autoridade da Concorrência (AdC)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Lei da Concorrência (Lei n.º 19/2012), Art. 9.º; Art. 101 AEUV
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other
Published
29 Jan 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.

20 Jan 2026 PHOENIX Zdravotnícke zásobovanie, a.s.; TRANSMEDIC SLOVAKIA, s.r.o. (in Konkurs)Pharmaceutical cartel uncovered thanks to whistleblower: 7.8 million EUR against PHOENIX and TRANSMEDIC SlovakiaCartels and collusion €7.8m

The two companies colluded in tenders of the General Health Insurance Company for the supply of medicines (2017–2020). For the first time, a cartel was uncovered on the basis of information from a whistleblower; the Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (Antimonopoly Office of the Slovak Republic, PMÚ SR) imposed 7,595,200 EUR and a one-year procurement ban on PHOENIX and 201,800 EUR and a three-year procurement ban on TRANSMEDIC (first instance).

What organisations can take from it

Whistleblowers receive a reward in Slovakia – internal reporting channels should be faster than the route to the authority.

Relevance to training and awareness

Bid rigging in public tenders; whistleblowing channels

Authority / court
Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (PMÚ SR)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Slowakisches Wettbewerbsschutzgesetz (Submissionsabsprache)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Healthcare
Culpability
intentional
Mitigating circumstances
PHOENIX: settlement with a 30% fine reduction and a shortened procurement ban.
Published
24 Feb 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.

31 Dec 2025 C2MAC Group, Fonderie De Riccardis, Zanardi Fonderie u. a. (Gießereikartell, 12 Unternehmen und Assofond)Italy: 70 million EUR against 16 foundries and the association Assofond over price index cartel ItalyCartels and collusion €70m

From 2004 to June 2024, foundries coordinated their pricing strategies via the association Assofond: they exchanged sensitive information and developed joint indexation mechanisms ("Assofond indicators") in order to push through price increases including margins. The AGCM imposed fines of 70 million EUR (maximum around 600 million EUR), taking the crisis in the sector into account as a mitigating factor. Addressees: C2MAC Group, Fonderia Corrà, Fonderie De Riccardis, Fonderie Guido Glisenti/Lead Time, Pilenga Baldassarre/E.F. Group, Fonderie Mora Gavardo/Camozzi Group, Zanardi Fonderie, VDP Fonderia, Fonderie Ariotti, Ironcastings, Fonderia Zardo, ZML Industries/Cividale, Assofond.

What organisations can take from it

Joint price indices within an association are only permissible if they do not enable coordination of margins or prices – metalworking companies should have their association activities accompanied by competition law advice.

Relevance to training and awareness

Association indices and price adjustment clauses as a coordination tool

Authority / court
Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 101 AEUV
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Steel and metals
Mitigating circumstances
The severe crisis in the foundry sector was taken into account in setting the fines
Published
31 Dec 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.

23 Dec 2025 Ryanair DAC, Ryanair Holdings plcItaly: 255.8 million EUR against Ryanair for obstructing travel agencies ItalyAbuse of market power €255.8m

From April 2023 until at least April 2025, Ryanair obstructed travel agencies from buying Ryanair flights in combination with other services, for example through facial recognition procedures, account deletions, blocking of means of payment and restrictive partner agreements. The AGCM considered this to be an abuse of a dominant position and imposed fines of 255,761,692 EUR on a joint and several basis.

What organisations can take from it

Dominant providers must not use technical barriers to force sales partners and resellers out of the market.

Authority / court
Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Art. 102 AEUV
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Transport, logistics and shipping
Employees
10,000 or more
Published
23 Dec 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.

18 Dec 2025 Snowball.xyz-Gruppe (Snowball.xyz, Šviesa, Tavo mokykla, Ateities pamoka) und AL holdingas-Gruppe (AL holdingas, Ugdymo sprendimai, UNT nuoma)E-register providers shared the market – 3.6 million EUR in cartel fines LithuaniaCartels and collusion €3.63m

In August 2020, the operators of the electronic class registers ‘Tamo’ and ‘Eduka’ agreed to stop competing: one group kept the class register business, the other took over the digital learning content. Following acknowledgement of the infringement, the fines were reduced by 15%: 2,714,940 EUR jointly and severally for the Snowball.xyz group and 913,340 EUR for the AL holdingas group (Art. 101 TFEU). The decision can be appealed. Source: archived copy of the press release.

What organisations can take from it

Agreements between competitors on ‘who does what’ are cartels – even when dressed up as portfolio streamlining.

Relevance to training and awareness

Market sharing among competitors

Authority / court
Konkurencijos taryba (Litauischer Wettbewerbsrat)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Konkurencijos įstatymas; Art. 101 AEUV
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Telecoms, IT and software
Mitigating circumstances
Acknowledgement of the infringement (15% reduction)
Published
18 Dec 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.

18 Dec 2025 Bravogroup Holding Vagyonkezelő Kft.Bravogroup: 32.6 million HUF for unnotified stake in Xiaomi distributor HungaryMerger control €84,042

In February 2023, the IT holding company acquired a 50% stake with negative sole control in the Xiaomi distributor Mystical Hungary Zrt., but only approached the Gazdasági Versenyhivatal (Hungarian Competition Authority, GVH) after 582 days and notified the concentration thereafter. Following voluntary disclosure, acknowledgement and waiver of legal remedies, the authority imposed a significantly reduced 32.6 million HUF.

What organisations can take from it

Blocking rights (negative control) can also trigger a notification requirement – review stakes under merger control law before signing.

Relevance to training and awareness

Merger control for minority stakes with veto rights

Authority / court
Gazdasági Versenyhivatal (GVH)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Ungarisches Wettbewerbsgesetz, Vollzugsverbot (VJ/20/2025)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Telecoms, IT and software
Culpability
negligent
Mitigating circumstances
Voluntary disclosure, acknowledgement and waiver of legal remedies.
Published
18 Dec 2025

Original amount 32,600,000 HUF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 18 Dec 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.

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.

11 Dec 2025 „ЗП Либра“ ООДZP Libra: 44,205 leva for poaching customers using competitor’s trade secrets BulgariaCompetition law €22,602

With the help of an employee of its competitor I&G Insurance Brokers who later moved to ZP Libra, the broker unfairly concluded a brokerage agreement to the detriment of the competitor and used the competitor’s trade secrets to poach customers. The Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (Bulgarian Commission for the Protection of Competition, KZK) imposed 29,470 leva (1% of 2024 turnover, Art. 36(1) ZZK – Bulgarian Protection of Competition Act) and 14,735 leva (0.5%, Art. 37(1) ZZK); fines totalling 1,000 leva were also imposed on the employee.

What organisations can take from it

When hiring employees from competitors, make sure they do not bring customer lists or secrets with them – otherwise both the company and the individual are liable.

Relevance to training and awareness

Taking customer data and trade secrets when changing employer

Authority / court
Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (КЗК, Bulgarische Wettbewerbskommission)
Area of law
Competition law
Legal basis
Art. 36 Abs. 1, Art. 37 Abs. 1 ZZK
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Liability of senior managers
Fines on the employee involved (1,000 leva in total)
Published
16 Dec 2025

Original amount 44,205 BGN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 11 Dec 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.

5 Dec 2025 Volvo Hungária Kereskedelmi és Szolgáltató Kft.; Seres Gépipari Kereskedelmi Kft.; GIF Modul Kft.; Interteher Kft.; Eurotrade Kft.; He Hans Eibinger Kft. (MUT Kft. ohne Buße nach Entschädigung)Refuse vehicle cartel: over 1.5 billion HUF, of which 270 million for obstructing the inspection HungaryCartels and collusion €4.06m

In 2014–2015, chassis and body manufacturers allocated contracts and submitted cover bids in tenders for refuse collection and sewer cleaning vehicles. The Gazdasági Versenyhivatal (Hungarian Competition Authority, GVH) imposed cartel fines of 1,278.4 million HUF (of which 972.9 million on Volvo Hungária) and, in addition, a record procedural fine of 270 million HUF on Volvo Hungária for obstructing access to data secured during the inspection.

What organisations can take from it

Regular meetings on ‘capacity planning’ with competitors are cartel evidence – and obstructing an inspection costs extra.

Relevance to training and awareness

Bid rigging and conduct during inspections

Authority / court
Gazdasági Versenyhivatal (GVH)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Ungarisches Wettbewerbsgesetz, Art. 101 AEUV (Submissionsabsprachen, Verfahrensbuße; VJ/30/2018)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Automotive
Culpability
intentional
Mitigating circumstances
Admissions and leniency applications by most participants; MUT paid 116 million HUF in compensation to contracting authorities.
Published
5 Dec 2025

Original amount 1,548,400,000 HUF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 5 Dec 2025.

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.

1 Dec 2025 SUROVINA d.o.o.; SALOMON d.o.o.; RECIKEL d.o.o.; DINOS d.o.o.Packaging waste: AVK finds market sharing by four waste management companies SloveniaCartels and collusion Order

In the reopened proceedings, the Javna agencija Republike Slovenije za varstvo konkurence (Slovenian Competition Protection Agency, AVK) found that the companies had shared the market for take-back schemes for packaging waste and agreed to stop providing their services to a competitor (now Interzero). The authority ordered immediate termination; the decision is not final, and an earlier decision from 2019 in the same matter is partly final.

What organisations can take from it

An agreement to stop supplying a common competitor is a cartel – even in regulated waste management markets.

Relevance to training and awareness

Boycott and market-sharing agreements

Authority / court
Javna agencija Republike Slovenije za varstvo konkurence (AVK)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 6 ZPOmK-1, Art. 101 AEUV (3062-5/2017)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Published
16 Apr 2026
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.

17 Nov 2025 TotalEnergies Marketing France, Rubis Énergie, Rubis Terminal, EG RetailFrance: 187.5 million EUR against fuel suppliers over depot agreement in Corsica FranceCartels and collusion €187.5m

Between 2016 and 2023, the shareholders of the Corsican fuel storage company DPLC made the use of the depots conditional on a shareholding by means of a contractual clause; non-shareholders had to buy their fuel from their competitors, which could push up pump prices in Corsica (decision 25-D-07). Fines: TotalEnergies Marketing France 115.82 million EUR, Rubis 64.67 million EUR, EG Retail 7 million EUR.

What organisations can take from it

Shared infrastructure of competitors must be open to third parties on fair terms – shareholder agreements should be reviewed under competition law.

Relevance to training and awareness

Joint ventures of competitors and access conditions for third parties

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 AEUV
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
under appeal
Sector
Energy and utilities
Employees
10,000 or more
Published
17 Nov 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.

6 Nov 2025 DoctolibFrance: 4.665 million EUR against Doctolib for abuse in doctor appointment booking FranceAbuse of market power €4.67m

Doctolib tied doctors with exclusivity clauses, bundled telemedicine with the appointment booking subscription and in 2018 acquired its main competitor MonDocteur in order to eliminate it (decision 25-D-06). Fines: 4.615 million EUR for exclusivity and tying, 50,000 EUR for the acquisition.

What organisations can take from it

Platforms with high market shares should have exclusivity clauses, bundled offers and acquisitions of rivals reviewed under competition law.

Authority / court
Autorité de la concurrence
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Art. 102 AEUV, Art. L.420-2 Code de commerce
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
under appeal
Sector
Healthcare
Culpability
intentional
Published
6 Nov 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.

6 Nov 2025 UAB „Emsi“Emsi took over four filling stations without merger clearance – 1.02 million EUR LithuaniaMerger control €1.02m

In 2024, Emsi acquired control of four filling stations in Kaunas, Vilnius and Maišiagala through leases (via an affiliated company) and purchases without obtaining the required clearances, ignoring previous notices from the Konkurencijos taryba (Lithuanian Competition Council). For two concentrations, fines of 545,160 EUR and 477,010 EUR were imposed, a total of 1,022,170 EUR, together with an obligation to remedy the situation within three months. Source: archived copy of the press release.

What organisations can take from it

Even the long-term lease of individual sites may require notification – if in doubt, ask the authority beforehand.

Relevance to training and awareness

Merger control also for leases of individual sites

Authority / court
Konkurencijos taryba (Litauischer Wettbewerbsrat)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Konkurencijos įstatymas (Anmelde- und Genehmigungspflicht für Zusammenschlüsse)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Published
6 Nov 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.

3 Nov 2025 Groupe ParfaitFrance: 7.6 million EUR against Groupe Parfait for failing to meet merger remedies (Martinique) FranceMerger control €7.6m

In 2022, clearance of an acquisition in food retail in Martinique was made conditional on the divestiture of a Géant Casino hypermarket by September 2023; Parfait only sold it in September 2025, allowed the value of the assets to deteriorate and obstructed the trustee (decision 25-D-05). Fines: 4.5 million EUR (divestiture), 2.5 million EUR (preservation of value), 600,000 EUR (cooperation).

What organisations can take from it

Merger control commitments are binding – missed deadlines and a lack of cooperation with the trustee are sanctioned separately.

Relevance to training and awareness

Compliance with merger remedies and cooperation with trustees

Authority / court
Autorité de la concurrence
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Verstoß gegen Zusagen aus Freigabeentscheidung 22-DCC-254 (Fusionskontrolle, Code de commerce)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
under appeal
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Published
3 Nov 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.

31 Oct 2025 "MAXIMA Latvija" SIAMaxima Latvija pays 1.87 million EUR for price pressure on food suppliers LatviaAbuse of market power €1.87m

From November 2021 to August 2024, the retailer (market share 28%) put pressure on economically dependent suppliers: price increases remained unapproved for months, lower prices were demanded in the form of ultimatums and delisting was threatened. The Konkurences padome (Latvian Competition Council) found an unfair trading practice, imposed 1,872,805 EUR and set clear deadlines for negotiations.

What organisations can take from it

Purchasing departments of retailers with strong market power need clear rules for price negotiations – threats of delisting are off limits.

Relevance to training and awareness

Fair purchasing negotiations with suppliers

Authority / court
Konkurences padome (Lettischer Wettbewerbsrat)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Negodīgas tirdzniecības prakses aizlieguma likums (NTPAL)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Published
5 Nov 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.

30 Oct 2025 MM Grupp OÜCinema chain MM Grupp (Apollo) took over Forum Cinemas without clearance – 7.5 million EUR LithuaniaMerger control €7.51m

In 2021, the Estonian parent company of Apollo cinemas acquired control of Forum Cinemas Lithuania before the notified merger had been cleared and integrated the cinemas in Vilnius and Kaunas into its network, even though the Konkurencijos taryba (Lithuanian Competition Council) had provisionally expressed competition concerns. Fine of 7,507,930 EUR (0.8% of consolidated worldwide turnover) and obligation to end the infringement within six months. Source: archived copy of the press release.

What organisations can take from it

No implementation before clearance: restructurings and leases can also constitute prohibited early implementation.

Authority / court
Konkurencijos taryba (Litauischer Wettbewerbsrat)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Konkurencijos įstatymas (Vollzugsverbot bei Zusammenschlüssen)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Media and online platforms
Published
30 Oct 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.

27 Oct 2025 SINOP ALFA, s.r.o.SINOP ALFA: 70,000 EUR for refusing to hand over business mobile phone during inspection SlovakiaCompetition law €70,000

During an unannounced inspection in the air-conditioning, refrigeration and heat pump services sector, the company repeatedly refused to produce a mobile phone used for business purposes. The Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (Antimonopoly Office of the Slovak Republic, PMÚ SR) regarded this as obstruction of the inspection and imposed 70,000 EUR, around 1% of the previous year’s turnover (not final).

What organisations can take from it

Business smartphones are part of the documents that may be inspected – a dawn raid guide for employees prevents costly wrong reactions.

Relevance to training and awareness

Conduct during inspections (dawn raids), handing over mobile devices

Authority / court
Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (PMÚ SR)
Area of law
Competition law
Legal basis
Slowakisches Wettbewerbsschutzgesetz (Mitwirkungspflicht bei Nachprüfungen)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Culpability
intentional
Published
28 Oct 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.

25 Sep 2025 „Смарт Софт“ ЕООДBidder Smart Soft denigrates competitor in letters to schools – 37,410 leva BulgariaCompetition law €19,128

During ongoing tenders for school equipment, Smart Soft sent dozens of identical letters to schools in the Plovdiv/Pazardzhik/Panagyurishte region containing untrue or distorted statements about its competitor Evroklas-konsult. The Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (Bulgarian Commission for the Protection of Competition, KZK) found damage to reputation (Art. 30 ZZK – Bulgarian Protection of Competition Act) over around two months and imposed 3% of 2024 turnover, i.e. 37,410 leva. An appeal has been lodged against the decision.

What organisations can take from it

Have sales letters about competitors – especially to public contracting authorities – legally reviewed before they are sent.

Relevance to training and awareness

Communication about competitors in sales

Authority / court
Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (КЗК, Bulgarische Wettbewerbskommission)
Area of law
Competition law
Legal basis
Art. 30 ZZK (Schädigung des guten Rufs eines Wettbewerbers)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
under appeal
Sector
Telecoms, IT and software

Original amount 37,410 BGN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 25 Sep 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.

1 Sep 2025 SIA "SILTUMTEHSERVISS", SIA "Apkure IM", SIA "ADAPTERIS", SIA "Alpex", SIA "Infrakom"Bid-rigging cartel in pipeline construction contracts – five construction firms pay 513,508 EUR LatviaCartels and collusion €513,508

From 2021 to 2024, two groups of construction companies coordinated in more than 30 public tenders for the construction and repair of utility pipelines: they exchanged sensitive information, determined winners and submitted sham bids. Prompted by information from the contracting entity Rīgas namu pārvaldnieks, the Konkurences padome (Latvian Competition Council) imposed a total of 513,508.08 EUR.

What organisations can take from it

Jointly preparing bids with competitors – even where the work is later carried out jointly – is a cartel; tender teams must know this.

Relevance to training and awareness

Competition law in tenders

Authority / court
Konkurences padome (Lettischer Wettbewerbsrat)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 11 Abs. 1 Konkurences likums
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Mitigating circumstances
All companies except Infrakom concluded a settlement with the Competition Council, acknowledged the facts and waived an appeal; in return, a 10% fine reduction.
Published
10 Sep 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.

13 Aug 2025 Portugal: 30,000 EUR for exclusive tying of banana growers on Madeira PortugalAbuse of market power €30,000

A dominant company for the collection, distribution and marketing of Madeira bananas (name not given) required producers to sign exclusivity declarations. In a settlement procedure (PRC/2025/6), it ended the practice and paid 30,000 EUR (date = press release).

What organisations can take from it

Dominant buyers must not tie suppliers through exclusivity clauses – even small regional markets are being watched.

Authority / court
Autoridade da Concorrência (AdC)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Lei da Concorrência (Lei n.º 19/2012), Art. 11.º; Art. 102 AEUV
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Food and agriculture
Mitigating circumstances
Settlement (transação), full cooperation, immediate cessation, short duration
Published
13 Aug 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.

25 Jul 2025 Tamro Eesti OÜTamro Eesti: order against unfair payment terms for food supplements EstoniaAbuse of market power Order

In consignment agreements, the pharmaceutical wholesaler had made payment to suppliers of food supplements dependent on subsequent resale (payment period over 30 days) and had reserved the right to hold suppliers liable for spoiled goods. The Konkurentsiamet (Estonian Competition Authority) found infringements of the act on unfair trading practices in the food supply chain and ordered amended contractual terms.

What organisations can take from it

Purchasing terms in the food sector – including for food supplements – must comply with the 30-day payment period and the prohibition on shifting risk.

Authority / court
Konkurentsiamet (Estnische Wettbewerbsbehörde)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
§ 4 Abs. 1 und 2, § 5 Abs. 2, § 7 Abs. 1 PTEKS (UTP-Richtlinie (EU) 2019/633)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals

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 Jul 2025 ATE, s. r. o.; AŽD Praha s.r.o.; EPLcond a.s.; MONZAS, a.s.; První SaZ Plzeň a.s.; STARMON s.r.o.Railway signalling: 157.7 million CZK against six companies for bid rigging CzechiaCartels and collusion €6.39m

The six companies colluded on cover bids, market sharing and prices in 26 contracts awarded by the state railway infrastructure administration (total value over 850 million CZK, 2015–2021). In a settlement procedure, the Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže (Czech Office for the Protection of Competition, ÚOHS) imposed a total of 157.693 million CZK at first instance; two companies appealed against the amount.

What organisations can take from it

A cover bid submitted ‘as a favour’ is bid rigging – sales and costing teams must be aware of this.

Relevance to training and awareness

Cover bids and collusion in public tenders

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže (ÚOHS)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Tschechisches Wettbewerbsgesetz, Art. 101 AEUV (Submissionsabsprachen)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
under appeal
Sector
Construction and real estate
Culpability
intentional
Mitigating circumstances
Settlement (20% reduction, no procurement ban), leniency application by one participant and compliance programmes at two companies.
Published
2 Jul 2025

Original amount 157,693,000 CZK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 2 Jul 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.

26 Jun 2025 SIA "Mārupes komunālie pakalpojumi"Water utility Mārupes komunālie pakalpojumi abuses monopoly over additional meters LatviaAbuse of market power €78,056

From January 2022, by internal instruction, the municipal water utility reserved to itself the installation of additional water meters (for example for garden water), thereby excluding other providers; customers also had to pay for sewerage they did not use. The Konkurences padome (Latvian Competition Council) found an abuse of a dominant position, imposed 78,055.79 EUR and ordered remedies.

What organisations can take from it

Municipal utilities are also subject to competition law – internal instructions that foreclose neighbouring markets are risky.

Authority / court
Konkurences padome (Lettischer Wettbewerbsrat)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Art. 13 Konkurences likums
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Published
9 Jul 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.

24 Jun 2025 Brantner Fatra, s.r.o.Brantner Fatra: 180,200 EUR for excessive landfill prices charged to two towns upheld SlovakiaAbuse of market power €180,200

In 2019–2022, the waste management company charged the towns of Martin and Vrútky significantly higher prices for landfilling residual waste than other municipalities without objective justification, although they had no alternative. The Council of the Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (Antimonopoly Office of the Slovak Republic, PMÚ SR) upheld the fine of 180,200 EUR; the decision became final on 3 July 2025.

What organisations can take from it

Suppliers without a local alternative must be able to justify and document price differences between customers on objective grounds.

Authority / court
Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (PMÚ SR)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Slowakisches Wettbewerbsschutzgesetz (Missbrauch einer marktbeherrschenden Stellung)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Energy and utilities
Published
9 Jul 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.

24 Jun 2025 Slovenská asociácia palivového priemyslu a obchoduFirst labour market cartel: fuel association sanctioned for no-poach rule SlovakiaCartels and collusion €10,000

In a ‘code of ethics’, the industry association obliged its members not to poach each other’s employees. In its first decision on labour market cartels, the Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (Antimonopoly Office of the Slovak Republic, PMÚ SR) imposed a symbolic fine of 10,000 EUR (first instance) as a warning to business.

What organisations can take from it

No-poach agreements between competitors are cartels – HR departments and associations should review existing codes.

Relevance to training and awareness

No-poach agreements and HR departments

Authority / court
Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (PMÚ SR)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Slowakisches Wettbewerbsschutzgesetz (Beschluss einer Unternehmensvereinigung)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Published
2 Jul 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.

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.

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.

8 May 2025 „Кауфланд България ЕООД енд Ко“ КДKaufland demanded payments from suppliers for marketing and logistics – 500,000 leva BulgariaAbuse of market power €255,650

Following a preliminary investigation into rising food prices, the Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (Bulgarian Commission for the Protection of Competition, KZK) found that Kaufland had demanded and received payments from five suppliers for ‘marketing services’ and for ‘optimisation of goods flows’ and logistics that were not fully connected with the sale of their products. For the two prohibited trading practices (Art. 37b(1)(4) ZZK – Bulgarian Protection of Competition Act) it imposed 250,000 leva each, a total of 500,000 leva. An appeal has been lodged against the decision.

What organisations can take from it

Charges to suppliers are only permissible if they are matched by a specific service connected with the sale.

Relevance to training and awareness

Fair terms towards suppliers

Authority / court
Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (КЗК, Bulgarische Wettbewerbskommission)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Art. 37b Abs. 1 Nr. 4 ZZK (verbotene Handelspraktiken in der Lebensmittelkette, UTP-Richtlinie)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
under appeal
Sector
Retail and e-commerce

Original amount 500,000 BGN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 8 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.

2 May 2025 Ατλάντα Αντιπροσωπείαι – Διανομαί Α.Ε.Greece: 127,314 EUR against breakfast cereal distributor Atlanta for resale price maintenance GreeceCartels and collusion €127,314

From March to August 2021, the distribution partner for breakfast cereals set resale prices, which retailers and supermarket chains largely adopted. The Επιτροπή Ανταγωνισμού (Hellenic Competition Commission) accepted the settlement proposal and, by Decision 878/2025, imposed a reduced fine of 127,314 EUR; date = press release.

What organisations can take from it

Even short periods of imposing prices on retailers carry fines – sales teams must know the line between recommendation and requirement.

Relevance to training and awareness

Resale price maintenance towards retailers

Authority / court
Επιτροπή Ανταγωνισμού (Hellenic Competition Commission)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 1 Gesetz 3959/2011; Art. 101 AEUV
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Food and agriculture
Mitigating circumstances
Settlement procedure with fine reduction
Published
2 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.

24 Apr 2025 Johnson & Johnson Consumer NV; Boehringer Ingelheim SComm; Haleon Belgium NVJohnson & Johnson, Boehringer, Haleon: 11.2 million EUR for shelf-placement collusion in pharmacies BelgiumCartels and collusion €11.2m

Over more than 15 years, the three OTC medicine manufacturers jointly developed the category management project ‘SMAN’, through which they steered the placement of non-prescription medicines in selected pharmacies in their favour and disadvantaged or excluded competing products. In a settlement procedure, the Autorité belge de la Concurrence / Belgische Mededingingsautoriteit (Belgian Competition Authority, BMA) imposed a total of 11,249,280.48 EUR.

What organisations can take from it

Category management agreements with retailers must not push competitors off the shelf – joint planograms with competitors are off limits.

Relevance to training and awareness

Competition law limits of category management

Authority / court
Autorité belge de la Concurrence / Belgische Mededingingsautoriteit (BMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Code de droit économique Art. IV.1; AEUV Art. 101
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
Employees
10,000 or more
Published
24 Apr 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.

Load 20 more of 22

Ready for training that sticks?

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

Start free trial