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.

Competition law Clear all filters
99cases from 24 jurisdictions
€2.76bnTotal of monetary amounts (84 cases with an amount)
€462.6mLargest single case: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (Teva-Gruppe)
€1.7mMedian 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 20235€37.7m
Q1 20242€5.02m
Q2 20242€133,212
Q3 20243€434.9m
Q4 20249€470m
Q1 20255€84m
Q2 202511€815.4m
Q3 20257€6.96m
Q4 202518€615.8m
Q1 20269€123.5m
Q2 202611€61.7m
Q3 202617€106.2m

99 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.

24 Sep 2026 M&J GroupCMA: fines against construction firm and two employees for concealing evidence during an inspection United KingdomCartels and collusion €58,149

During an inspection as part of an investigation into bid rigging, the Estimating Director Barry Pirrie instructed the Office Manager Tracey Woods to remove a work mobile phone and documents from the premises, and denied having a work mobile phone. The UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) imposed fines of 25,000 GBP on M&J, 20,000 GBP on Pirrie and 5,000 GBP on Woods.

What organisations can take from it

Dawn raid training is mandatory: anyone who removes mobile phones or documents during an inspection is personally liable – even when acting on a superior's instructions.

Relevance to training and awareness

Correct conduct during inspections (dawn raids), no removal of evidence

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Section 40A(1) Competition Act 1998
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Culpability
intentional
Liability of senior managers
Personal fines against Barry Pirrie (20,000 GBP) and Tracey Woods (5,000 GBP)
Published
24 Sep 2026

Original amount 50,000 GBP, 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.

24 Sep 2026 Kalibrate Canada (Tochter der Kalibrate Technologies Ltd.)Canada: Kalibrate must stop sharing retailer-specific petrol station data CanadaAbuse of market power Order

Kalibrate's "Market Intelligence" product passed on retailer-specific sales data from petrol stations that allowed conclusions to be drawn about competitors and could facilitate coordinated pricing behaviour. In an agreement registered with the Competition Tribunal, Kalibrate undertakes to supply only aggregated and time-delayed data – the first case under the reformed abuse of dominance rules.

What organisations can take from it

Providers of market and price data must ensure that their products do not disseminate individualised competitor data.

Authority / court
Competition Bureau Canada (Consent Agreement beim Competition Tribunal)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Abuse-of-dominance-Bestimmungen des Competition Act (Fassung 2023)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Published
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.

19 Aug 2026 Sioux Erosion Control Inc.DOJ: jury convicts erosion control firm of price fixing in Oklahoma road construction USACartels and collusion —

A jury found Sioux Erosion Control, co-owner BG Dale Biscoe and employee Randall David Shelton guilty of having fixed prices for erosion control services, allocated contracts regionally and rigged bids on publicly funded road construction projects in Oklahoma (more than 100 million USD) from 2017 to 2023. Sentencing was still pending.

What organisations can take from it

Subcontractors in public road construction are also targeted by prosecutors – up to and including jury convictions of individual employees.

Relevance to training and awareness

Price-fixing and territorial agreements for subcontracted services in road construction

Authority / court
U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Section 1 Sherman Act
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Liability of senior managers
Guilty verdict against co-owner BG Dale Biscoe and employee Randall David Shelton
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.

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.

14 Aug 2026 Henkel AG & Co. KGaAHenkel/Liquid Nails: court blocks takeover of Loctite’s main competitor USAMerger control Order

Henkel wanted to buy the construction adhesive brand Liquid Nails for 725 million USD from the financial investor American Industrial Partners, thereby taking over the main competitor of its Loctite brand. After a seven-day trial, the federal court, on application by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), issued a permanent injunction against the acquisition.

What organisations can take from it

Acquiring the closest competitor carries a high risk of prohibition, even at a moderate deal volume.

Authority / court
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (auf Antrag der FTC)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Section 7 Clayton Act; Section 13(b) FTC Act (Permanent Injunction)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
Employees
10,000 or more
Published
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.

2 Jun 2026 Ascension Health Alliance; AmSurg LLC / Ambulatory Topco LLCAscension/AmSurg: seven ambulatory surgery centres must be sold USAMerger control Order

The non-profit hospital group Ascension wanted to acquire AmSurg for 3.9 billion USD. Owing to overlaps in outpatient surgery in five regions, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) requires the sale of seven AmSurg centres to SC Affiliates and a gastroenterology practice, as well as transitional support.

What organisations can take from it

Non-profit healthcare providers are also subject to merger control – regional market shares determine divestitures.

Authority / court
Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Section 7 Clayton Act; Section 5 FTC Act (Consent Order)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Healthcare
Employees
10,000 or more

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

22 May 2026 Parrish & Heimbecker, Limited; GrainsConnect Canada Operations Inc.Canada: grain elevator must be sold in the takeover of GrainsConnect CanadaMerger control Order

The planned acquisition of GrainsConnect by Parrish & Heimbecker would have reduced competition for the purchase of wheat from farmers around Reford (Saskatchewan). The Competition Bureau reached an agreement under which P&H must divest the grain elevator in Reford to an approved buyer and continue to operate it normally until then.

What organisations can take from it

Merger control also has local effects: even a single site can trigger a divestiture requirement.

Authority / court
Competition Bureau Canada (Consent Agreement beim Competition Tribunal)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Competition Act (Kanada), Fusionskontrolle
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Food and agriculture
Published
22 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.

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.

17 Dec 2025 Greencore Group plcGreencore/Bakkavor: takeover only with sale of sauce plant in Bristol United KingdomMerger control Order

In the planned acquisition of the food manufacturer Bakkavor, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) found a substantial lessening of competition in chilled own-label sauces for UK supermarkets. It cleared the merger only because Greencore undertook to sell its entire chilled soups and sauces plant in Bristol, including its employees, to a pre-determined purchaser.

What organisations can take from it

Even overlaps in small product segments can hold up an entire acquisition – prepare remedies early.

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Enterprise Act 2002, s. 73(2) (Undertakings in lieu of reference)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Food and agriculture
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.

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.

3 Dec 2025 The Boeing Company und Spirit AeroSystems Holdings, Inc.Boeing/Spirit AeroSystems: takeover only with divestiture of Airbus supplier plants USAMerger control Order

For the 8.3 billion USD takeover of the fuselage and wing supplier Spirit AeroSystems, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) required Boeing to divest Spirit’s Airbus businesses to Airbus and the plant in Subang, Malaysia, to CTRM, to provide transitional services and to continue supplying defence competitors. A monitor oversees implementation.

What organisations can take from it

Vertical acquisitions of a supplier on which competitors also depend often only go through with divestitures and supply commitments.

Authority / court
Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Section 7 Clayton Act; Section 5 FTC Act (Consent Order)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Defence and security
Employees
10,000 or more

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

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.

14 Nov 2025 Valvoline Inc. und Greenbriar Equity Fund V, L.P.Valvoline/Greenbriar: FTC requires sale of 45 quick oil change shops USAMerger control Order

Valvoline wanted to acquire around 200 Oil Changers shops from Greenbriar for 625 million USD. Because the two competed directly in 25 local markets, under the proposed consent order the acquisition may only be completed if 45 shops are sold to Main Street Auto.

What organisations can take from it

For branch networks too, the competition authority examines each local market individually – map overlaps before the deal.

Authority / court
Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Section 7 Clayton Act; Section 5 FTC Act (Consent Order)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Automotive

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.

26 Aug 2025 GXO Logistics, Inc. und Wincanton LimitedGXO/Wincanton: supermarket warehouse logistics must be sold after takeover United KingdomMerger control Order

GXO had already acquired Wincanton in April 2024; the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) imposed a hold-separate order, appointed a monitoring trustee and, in Phase 2, found a lessening of competition in dedicated warehousing services for grocery retail. Under the final undertakings, GXO committed to divest Wincanton’s business serving supermarket customers.

What organisations can take from it

Anyone completing a deal before the merger review has concluded bears the risk of having to give up parts of the acquired business again.

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Enterprise Act 2002, ss. 41, 82, 90 (Final Undertakings)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Transport, logistics and shipping

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

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

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

What organisations can take from it

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

Relevance to training and awareness

Cover bids and territorial agreements in regional road construction

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

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

13 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.

17 Jun 2025 Safran S.A.Safran/Collins: clearance only in exchange for sale of actuation businesses United KingdomMerger control Order

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) found that Safran’s acquisition of part of the actuation and flight control business of Collins Aerospace (RTX) would result in a substantial lessening of competition in horizontal stabiliser trim actuators. Clearance was granted only in return for the undertaking to divest Safran’s North American actuation business, including sites in Mexico, California and Canada, to a pre-approved purchaser (Woodward).

What organisations can take from it

In acquisitions in concentrated supply markets, prepare remedies including a buyer early – here the CMA required an upfront buyer.

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Enterprise Act 2002, s. 73 (Undertakings in lieu of reference)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Manufacturing and mechanical engineering
Employees
10,000 or more
Published
23 Jun 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.

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

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

What organisations can take from it

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

Relevance to training and awareness

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

Authority / court
Europäische Kommission
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 101 AEUV, Art. 53 EWR-Abkommen
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Automotive
Employees
10,000 or more
Mitigating circumstances
Leniency programme (Mercedes-Benz 100 %, Stellantis/Opel 50 %, Mitsubishi 30 %, Ford 20 %), 10 % settlement reduction, lesser involvement of Honda, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Suzuki

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

21 Mar 2025 BT, IMG, ITV, BBC (Sky Kronzeuge)CMA: 4.24 million GBP against BT, IMG, ITV and BBC over collusion on freelancer fees United KingdomCartels and collusion €5.06m

Sports broadcasters and production companies exchanged sensitive information in 15 instances about day rates and fee increases for freelance camera operators and sound technicians in order to coordinate pay. Fines: BT 1,738,453 GBP, IMG 1,737,820 GBP, BBC 424,165 GBP, ITV 339,918 GBP; Sky received immunity as the first to come forward.

What organisations can take from it

HR and the procurement of freelance work are also subject to competition law – salary and fee information must not be shared with competitors.

Relevance to training and awareness

Exchanges about salaries and fees with competitors (labour market)

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Chapter I Competition Act 1998
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Media and online platforms
Employees
10,000 or more
Mitigating circumstances
20 % settlement discount for all; leniency discounts for BT, IMG, ITV; immunity for Sky
Published
21 Mar 2025

Original amount 4,240,356 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 21 Mar 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.

19 Feb 2025 Inetum (drei Gesellschaften der Unternehmensgruppe)Portugal: 3.09 million EUR against Inetum for no-poach agreements, upheld by court PortugalCartels and collusion €3.09m

From 2014 to 2021, the IT consultancy group participated in bilateral agreements not to poach competitors’ employees. The Autoridade da Concorrência (Portuguese Competition Authority, AdC) imposed 3,092,000 EUR on three companies; in March 2026, the Competition, Regulation and Supervision Court (TCRS) upheld the fine in full – the first judicial confirmation of a labour market cartel fine in Portugal.

What organisations can take from it

Agreements not to poach each other’s skilled staff are cartels – HR and managers must be aware of this.

Relevance to training and awareness

Prohibition of no-poach agreements between 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
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Telecoms, IT and software
Published
19 Feb 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.

12 Feb 2025 Synot W, a.s.; Ing. Igor Vicel (Unternehmer)Gambling takeover without notification: 428,500 EUR for gun-jumping SlovakiaMerger control €428,500

In 2020, Synot and a sole trader jointly acquired control of the gambling operator SLOV-MATIC, transferred shares and replaced corporate bodies before notifying the concentration. Under a settlement, the Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (Antimonopoly Office of the Slovak Republic, PMÚ SR) imposed 400,000 EUR on Synot and 28,500 EUR on the entrepreneur; final since 7 March 2025.

What organisations can take from it

Before closing, neither replace corporate bodies nor steer finances – M&A teams need a gun-jumping checklist.

Authority / court
Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (PMÚ SR)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Slowakisches Wettbewerbsschutzgesetz (Anmeldepflicht und Vollzugsverbot)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Other
Mitigating circumstances
Voluntary subsequent notification, admission and settlement (50% reduction).
Published
10 Mar 2025

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

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

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

What organisations can take from it

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

Relevance to training and awareness

Notification requirement for site takeovers through leases or tenancy agreements

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

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

7 Jan 2025 XCL Resources Holdings LLC, Verdun Oil Company II LLC, EP Energy LLCFTC: record penalty of 5.6 million USD for gun-jumping in oil producer acquisition USAMerger control €5.39m

During the HSR waiting period for the 1.4 billion USD acquisition of EP Energy, XCL and Verdun already took control of day-to-day operations: they halted drilling projects, managed customer contracts in Utah and coordinated prices in Texas (94 days). In a settlement filed by the DOJ on behalf of the FTC, the companies agreed to a civil penalty of 5.6 million USD – the highest ever for gun-jumping in the US; court approval under the Tunney Act was still pending at the time of publication.

What organisations can take from it

Until clearance, the buyer must not exert any influence on the target company's operations – integration teams need clear gun-jumping rules.

Relevance to training and awareness

Standstill obligation before clearance (gun-jumping) in integration planning

Authority / court
Federal Trade Commission (Klage durch das U.S. Department of Justice)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Hart-Scott-Rodino Act
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Published
7 Jan 2025

Original amount 5,600,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 7 Jan 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 2024 Hrvatski lovački savezCroatia: 89,935 EUR against hunting association for predatory pricing in hunter training CroatiaAbuse of market power €89,935

From 2022 to March 2024, the Croatian Hunting Association offered hunter training below cost and financed this from areas in which it holds a statutory monopoly in order to drive out competitors. The Agencija za zaštitu tržišnog natjecanja (Croatian Competition Agency, AZTN) imposed 89,935.20 EUR and ordered separate cost accounting; the High Administrative Court dismissed the action on 17 December 2025.

What organisations can take from it

An organisation holding a monopoly in one market must not use the profits from it to undercut in neighbouring markets – separate cost accounting provides evidence.

Authority / court
Agencija za zaštitu tržišnog natjecanja (AZTN)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Art. 13 Nr. 1 Zakon o zaštiti tržišnog natjecanja (ZZTN)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Other
Published
10 Feb 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 2024 Ericsson Nikola Tesla d.d., Kodeks d.o.o., Retel d.o.o., Vatel d.o.o., LUMISS d.o.o., Mitel Austria GmbHCroatia: 1.17 million EUR against Ericsson Nikola Tesla and five partners for customer allocation CroatiaCartels and collusion €1.17m

From 2010 to 2015, the suppliers of Ericsson/Aastra/Mitel telephone systems (PBX) allocated customers among themselves so as not to undercut each other. The Agencija za zaštitu tržišnog natjecanja (Croatian Competition Agency, AZTN) imposed a total of 1,170,968.24 EUR, of which 785,570.58 EUR on Ericsson Nikola Tesla; one leniency applicant (Steiner) was not penalised, and Kodeks received a reduction.

What organisations can take from it

Dealers of the same brand are also competitors – agreements on ‘own’ customers are a hardcore cartel.

Relevance to training and awareness

No agreements on customer or territorial allocation

Authority / court
Agencija za zaštitu tržišnog natjecanja (AZTN)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 8 Zakon o zaštiti tržišnog natjecanja (ZZTN)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Telecoms, IT and software
Mitigating circumstances
Leniency programme for two participants
Published
5 Mar 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.

22 Nov 2024 Viatris Inc.Viatris: 1.5 million GBP – key staff replaced despite hold-separate order United KingdomMerger control €1.8m

During the review of the sale of the European rights to the hormone products Duphaston and Femoston to Theramex, an Initial Enforcement Order was in force. Viatris replaced members of the UK management without the consent of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) and subsequently failed to report the breach; the CMA imposed 1.5 million GBP.

What organisations can take from it

During a merger review, staffing decisions in the target business also require consent – and breaches must be reported immediately.

Relevance to training and awareness

Standstill and interim obligations in merger proceedings (management, HR)

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Enterprise Act 2002, s. 72(2) (Initial Enforcement Order), s. 94A
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
Employees
10,000 or more

Original amount 1,500,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Nov 2024.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

21 Nov 2024 „Техномат-Меркурий“ ЕООД, ТПКИ „Здравоход“ (Rechtsnachfolger ТПКИ „Комфорт“), „Кавалер Юнион 2001“ ЕООДWork shoe cartel in tenders – 2.75 million leva for three manufacturers BulgariaCartels and collusion €1.4m

The Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (Bulgarian Commission for the Protection of Competition, KZK) found that three suppliers had fixed prices and shared markets in public tenders by various contracting authorities for professional work shoes (Art. 15 ZZK – Bulgarian Protection of Competition Act, Art. 101 TFEU). Sanctions: 1,678,897 leva (Technomat-Merkuriy), 657,675 leva (disabled persons’ cooperative Zdravohod) and 409,424 leva (Kavaler Union 2001), a total of 2,745,996 leva. Appeals have been lodged against the decision.

What organisations can take from it

Coordination on prices or on ‘who gets which contract’ is a hardcore cartel carrying a risk of millions, even among small niche suppliers.

Relevance to training and awareness

Competition law in tenders

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
under appeal
Sector
Other

Original amount 2,745,996 BGN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 21 Nov 2024.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

6 Nov 2024 Strabag AG (Köln); Kemna Bau Andreae GmbH & Co. KG als Kronzeuge ohne BußgeldBundeskartellamt: 2.79 million EUR against Strabag over collusion on Cologne's Zoobrücke GermanyCartels and collusion €2.79m

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

What organisations can take from it

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

Relevance to training and awareness

Cover bids and compensation payments in individual tenders

Authority / court
Bundeskartellamt
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
§ 1 GWB
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Construction and real estate
Employees
10,000 or more
Mitigating circumstances
Settlement
Liability of senior managers
The Cologne public prosecutor's office is prosecuting the individuals involved under Section 298 StGB (German Criminal Code)
Published
6 Nov 2024

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

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

Teva abused its dominant position for the MS medicine Copaxone: it artificially extended patent protection by filing staggered divisional applications with the EPO and strategically withdrawing them, and spread misleading statements about an authorised competing product among physicians and decision-makers. Seven Member States were affected over periods of four to nine years.

What organisations can take from it

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

Relevance to training and awareness

Disparaging statements about competing products to healthcare professionals

Authority / court
Europäische Kommission
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Art. 102 AEUV
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
Employees
10,000 or more

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

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

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

What organisations can take from it

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

Relevance to training and awareness

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

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

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

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

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

What organisations can take from it

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

Relevance to training and awareness

Cover bids in tenders for craft trades

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

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

7 Oct 2024 Eesti Keskkonnateenused ASEesti Keskkonnateenused must reduce excessive charges for moving waste containers EstoniaAbuse of market power Order

In 17 municipalities and towns with organised waste collection (16 price lists), the waste management company charged 8.33 to 20 EUR net per occasion for manually fetching containers over distances of 10 to 30 metres. The Konkurentsiamet (Estonian Competition Authority) considered this an abuse of a dominant position through excessively high prices and ordered the prices to be reduced to cost plus a reasonable profit by 31 October 2024.

What organisations can take from it

Companies with exclusive waste collection rights in an area must also price additional services on a cost basis.

Authority / court
Konkurentsiamet (Estnische Wettbewerbsbehörde)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
§ 16 Nr. 1, § 61¹ KonkS; § 28 Abs. 1 KorS
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities

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 Sep 2024 GA ADRIATIC, trženje in prodaja avtomobilov, d.o.o. (vormals Renault Nissan Slovenija)GA Adriatic (Renault): 650,000 EUR settlement for collusion on workshop contracts SloveniaCartels and collusion €650,000

In 2021, the Javna agencija Republike Slovenije za varstvo konkurence (Slovenian Competition Protection Agency, AVK) had found that the Renault importer and four car dealerships had infringed the cartel prohibition in the repair and maintenance of Renault vehicles for public contracting authorities. In a settlement procedure under the new competition act, GA Adriatic withdrew its action and received an administrative sanction of 650,000 EUR, payable in three instalments.

What organisations can take from it

Authorised dealer networks must not coordinate on public contracts – even where contracting authorities require brand workshops.

Relevance to training and awareness

Collusion between manufacturer and dealer network in tenders

Authority / court
Javna agencija Republike Slovenije za varstvo konkurence (AVK)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 6 ZPOmK-1 bzw. Art. 5 ZPOmK-2, Art. 101 AEUV; Vergleich nach Art. 95 ZPOmK-2 (3062-5/2024)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Automotive
Mitigating circumstances
Settlement with a reduction of up to 20%; termination after the inspection, cooperation.
Published
30 Sep 2024

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

18 Sep 2024 AGROFERT, a.s.AGROFERT: 21 million EUR for concealed takeover of two large bakeries upheld SlovakiaMerger control €21m

In 2013, AGROFERT acquired control of the bakeries PRVÁ BRATISLAVSKÁ PEKÁRENSKÁ and PEZA, but had the Žilina bakery held covertly by a third party for two years in order to circumvent the notification threshold – the authority had rejected an earlier takeover in 2011. The Council of the Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (Antimonopoly Office of the Slovak Republic, PMÚ SR) upheld the fine of 21 million EUR; final since 27 September 2024.

What organisations can take from it

Staggered acquisitions or acquisitions concealed via third parties are aggregated – circumvention structures increase the fine.

Authority / court
Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (PMÚ SR)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Slowakisches Wettbewerbsschutzgesetz (Nichtanmeldung und Vollzug eines Zusammenschlusses)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Food and agriculture
Culpability
intentional
Published
8 Oct 2024

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

30 Jul 2024 Booking.comSpain: 413 million EUR against Booking.com for abuse vis-à-vis hotels SpainAbuse of market power €413.2m

Booking.com, with a market share of 70–90 % in online hotel booking in Spain, imposed unfair conditions such as price parity clauses and obstructed other online travel agencies through ranking criteria (Expediente S/0005/21). The CNMC imposed a fine of 413.24 million EUR.

What organisations can take from it

Parity clauses and ranking advantages for exclusive partners are high-risk for dominant platforms.

Authority / court
Comisión Nacional de los Mercados y la Competencia (CNMC)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Art. 2 LDC, Art. 102 AEUV
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Media and online platforms
Employees
10,000 or more
Published
30 Jul 2024

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

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

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

What organisations can take from it

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

Relevance to training and awareness

Collusion in municipal waste disposal tenders

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

Original amount 95,138 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Jun 2024.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

10 Jun 2024 SIA "Mirastyle"Lighting retailer Mirastyle imposes resale prices and allocates projects LatviaCartels and collusion €34,490

The exclusive distributor of several lighting brands asked retailers by e-mail to align their prices with its ‘recommendations’ and threatened to stop supplies otherwise. It also exchanged information about projects with competing retailers and refused orders for projects planned by others. The Konkurences padome (Latvian Competition Council) imposed 34,490.26 EUR.

What organisations can take from it

‘Recommended’ prices enforced by supply stops are prohibited resale price maintenance.

Relevance to training and awareness

Resale price maintenance in sales

Authority / court
Konkurences padome (Lettischer Wettbewerbsrat)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 11 Konkurences likums (verbotene Vereinbarungen)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Mitigating circumstances
Cooperation with the Competition Council regarding the resale price maintenance (10% fine reduction for this infringement).
Published
13 Jun 2024

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

28 Feb 2024 Bloem Infra B.V.; Den Ouden Infra B.V. (Kronzeuge, 0 €)Netherlands: 59,000 EUR against construction company over sham bid in school playground tender NetherlandsCartels and collusion €59,000

In the tender for the design of a school playground in Roermond, Bloem Infra passed its bid on in advance to Den Ouden, which then deliberately bid higher (cover pricing). The Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) imposed a fine of 59,000 EUR on Bloem Infra; Den Ouden escaped a fine as the first to come forward.

What organisations can take from it

Even a single "helper bid" between construction companies on a small municipal contract is sanctioned – the first to come forward goes unpunished.

Relevance to training and awareness

Passing on one's own bids to co-bidders

Authority / court
Autoriteit Consument & Markt (ACM)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 6 Mededingingswet (Kartellverbot)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Mitigating circumstances
Leniency programme (Den Ouden 100 %), fine reduction for Bloem Infra for cooperation and acknowledgement
Published
7 Mar 2024

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

13 Feb 2024 ELECTROLUX (Unternehmen der schwedischen Electrolux-Gruppe; Rechtsform in der Mitteilung nicht genannt)Electrolux: record fine of 125.4 million CZK for resale price maintenance on household appliances CzechiaCartels and collusion €4.96m

From the end of 2012 at the latest until autumn 2021, Electrolux enforced minimum resale prices for appliances of the Electrolux, AEG and Zanussi brands, monitored prices via comparison portals and restricted resales. In a settlement procedure, the Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže (Czech Office for the Protection of Competition, ÚOHS) imposed 125.404 million CZK, the highest fine for vertical price fixing to date.

What organisations can take from it

Monitoring prices via comparison portals and then approaching retailers is classic resale price maintenance – sales staff must know where the line lies.

Relevance to training and awareness

Resale price maintenance and price monitoring in retail

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 (S0187/2023)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Employees
10,000 or more
Culpability
intentional
Mitigating circumstances
Voluntary termination, above-average cooperation, expansion of the compliance programme, settlement.
Published
13 Feb 2024

Original amount 125,404,000 CZK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 13 Feb 2024.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

20 Dec 2023 Veterinarska zbornica SlovenijeVeterinary chamber: 43,000 EUR for ban on discounts and advertising SloveniaCartels and collusion €43,000

Since 2015, the chamber’s professional code had prohibited its members from offering services below list price, at a discount or free of charge and from advertising prices and promotions – including online. As the first decision under the new act and in the first settlement procedure, the Javna agencija Republike Slovenije za varstvo konkurence (Slovenian Competition Protection Agency, AVK) imposed 43,000 EUR.

What organisations can take from it

Professional codes of chambers are decisions of associations of undertakings – price and advertising bans in them infringe competition law.

Authority / court
Javna agencija Republike Slovenije za varstvo konkurence (AVK)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 5 ZPOmK-2, Art. 101 AEUV (3062-13/2019)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Healthcare
Mitigating circumstances
Settlement with acknowledgement of responsibility.
Published
22 Jan 2024
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.

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

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

What organisations can take from it

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

Relevance to training and awareness

Bid rigging in private industrial contracts

Authority / court
Bundeskartellamt
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
§ 1 GWB
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Construction and real estate
Mitigating circumstances
Settlement by almost all companies; leniency applicant Hermann Kassens Bauunternehmung (proceedings discontinued)
Liability of senior managers
Fines or liability amounts imposed on twelve responsible individuals
Published
14 Dec 2023

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

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

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

What organisations can take from it

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

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

Original amount 18,362,014 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 4 Dec 2023.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

19 Oct 2023 Alkaloids of Australia, Alkaloids Corporation, Boehringer, Linnea, Transo-Pharm (C2 PHARMA Kronzeuge)EU: 13.4 million EUR against pharmaceutical ingredient cartel (SNBB for Buscopan) EU levelCartels and collusion €13.4m

From 2005 to 2019, six manufacturers and traders of the active ingredient SNBB (the base substance for Buscopan and generics) fixed minimum prices, allocated quotas and exchanged sensitive information. This was the first cartel concerning an active pharmaceutical ingredient that the Commission has sanctioned; C2 PHARMA received full immunity, and all parties reached a settlement.

What organisations can take from it

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

Relevance to training and awareness

Price and quota agreements in the trade in active ingredients

Authority / court
Europäische Kommission
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 101 AEUV, Art. 53 EWR-Abkommen
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
Mitigating circumstances
Leniency programme (C2 PHARMA 100 %, Transo-Pharm 50 %, Linnea 30 %), 10 % settlement reduction

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

19 Oct 2023 LITA, autorská spoločnosťLITA: fine for excessive licence fees for hotel TV upheld SlovakiaAbuse of market power €57,939

In 2015–2019, the collecting society charged hotels and guesthouses unreasonably high licence fees for the performance of works via television and radio sets in guest rooms. The Council of the Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (Antimonopoly Office of the Slovak Republic, PMÚ SR) upheld the fine of 57,939 EUR; final since 27 October 2023.

What organisations can take from it

Collecting societies with a statutory monopoly must also set reasonable tariffs.

Authority / court
Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky (PMÚ SR)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Slowakisches Wettbewerbsschutzgesetz, Art. 102 AEUV
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Media and online platforms
Published
31 Oct 2023

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

Ready for training that sticks?

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

Start free trial