Compliance Radar
Who was sanctioned, and for what?
Fines, court rulings and incidents from Europe and North America: 756 cases from 32 jurisdictions, each with an official source and checked against that source before publication. Filter by country, area of law and sector. Click a chart to drill down one level.
Click a bar to drill down one level.
Where?
by regionAll jurisdictions
What for?
by topicWho?
by companyWhen?
per quarter, by date of decision| Period | Cases | Total |
|---|---|---|
| Q3 2023 | 0 | — |
| Q4 2023 | 0 | — |
| Q1 2024 | 0 | — |
| Q2 2024 | 0 | — |
| Q3 2024 | 0 | — |
| Q4 2024 | 0 | — |
| Q1 2025 | 0 | — |
| Q2 2025 | 0 | — |
| Q3 2025 | 0 | — |
| Q4 2025 | 1 | €200,913 |
| Q1 2026 | 2 | €1.31m |
| Q2 2026 | 0 | — |
| Q3 2026 | 0 | — |
3 cases
13 Jan 2026 Estee Lauder Cosmetics Ltd.Estee Lauder Cosmetics: 750,000 CAD fine for unreported PFAS in eyeliners €463,765
A routine inspection in 2023 found that the company was selling eyeliners containing the PFAS substance perfluorononyl dimethicone without submitting the required notification of a ‘significant new activity’; a subsequent compliance order was not complied with. The court imposed 750,000 CAD; the company must inform its shareholders and is listed in the Environmental Offenders Registry.
Product development and regulatory affairs must check new substances for notification requirements before market launch; regulatory orders must be implemented within the deadline.
Chemical notification and approval obligations for product launches
- Authority / court
- Ontario Court of Justice (Ermittlungen: Environment and Climate Change Canada)
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances
- Legal basis
- Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (Significant New Activity, Compliance Order)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
- Published
- 2 Feb 2026
Original amount 750,000 CAD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 13 Jan 2026.
- Estee Lauder Cosmetics Ltd. fined $750,000 for violating the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
7 Jan 2026 Superior General Partner Inc.Superior General Partner: 1.35 million CAD fine for sodium chlorite in river and late reporting €845,987
In 2019, as a result of an equipment defect, sodium chlorite entered the Rivière du Lièvre twelve times from the ERCO Mondial chemical plant in Gatineau; in the last incident, the authorities were only informed after five days. The company was fined 1.35 million CAD, and the then technical and environmental director 15,000 CAD.
Reporting obligations for releases of substances apply immediately; those who wait for days incur additional liability – including personally as the person responsible.
Immediate reporting of environmental incidents to the authorities
- Authority / court
- Court of Québec (Ermittlungen: Environment and Climate Change Canada)
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances
- Legal basis
- Fisheries Act (Einbringen schädlicher Stoffe; unterlassene sofortige Meldung)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
- Liability of senior managers
- Jean-François Roux, the plant's then technical and environmental director, was personally fined 15,000 CAD.
- Published
- 8 Jan 2026
Original amount 1,365,000 CAD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 7 Jan 2026.
- Superior General Partner Inc. and one individual fined a total of $1,365,000 for violating the Fisheries Act Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
28 Oct 2025 ExxonMobil Chemical LimitedExxonMobil Chemical: 176,000 GBP fine for six days of continuous flaring in Fife €200,913
Following a loss of steam in April 2019, the ethylene plant in Fife flared for almost a week; the smoke significantly exceeded permit limits, and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) received over 900 complaints. Existing procedures and emergency plans should have prevented the incident but were not adequately followed. The company pleaded guilty and was fined 176,000 GBP.
Emergency plans only protect if staff apply them consistently in an emergency – regular drills are part of permit compliance.
Compliance with operating and emergency procedures in industrial plants
- Authority / court
- Kirkcaldy Sheriff Court (Ermittlungen: Scottish Environment Protection Agency, SEPA)
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
- Legal basis
- Regulation 67(1)(b) Pollution Prevention and Control (Scotland) Regulations 2012; Section 2 Pollution Prevention and Control Act 1999
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
- Employees
- 10,000 or more
- Culpability
- negligent
- Published
- 28 Oct 2025
Original amount 176,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 Oct 2025.
- ExxonMobil Chemical Limited fined £176,000 for six days of flaring that sounded like a jet engine Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link