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.

9cases from 1 jurisdiction
€5.54mTotal of monetary amounts (8 cases with an amount)
€2.9mLargest single case: Southern Water
€217,533Median per case with an amount

Click a bar to drill down one level.

Where?

by authority
  1. Bromley Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Environment Agency) €2.9m 52 % · 1 case
  2. Preston Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Environment Agency) €1.29m 23 % · 2 cases
  3. Derby Crown Court (Anklage: Environment Agency) €839,630 15 % · 1 case
  4. Environment Agency €234,153 4 % · 1 case
  5. Kirkcaldy Sheriff Court (Ermittlungen: Scottish Environment Protection Agency, SEPA) €200,913 4 % · 1 case
  6. Airdrie Sheriff Court (Ermittlungen: SEPA, Anklage: Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service) €58,610 1 % · 1 case
  7. Taunton Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Environment Agency) €18,635 0 % · 1 case
  8. Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) — 0 % · 1 case

What for?

by topic
  1. Emissions and permits €5.38m 97 % · 7 cases
  2. Waste and hazardous substances €164,216 3 % · 1 case
  3. Misleading environmental and sustainability claims — 0 % · 1 case

Who?

by sector

All sectors

  1. Energy and utilities €4.86m 88 % · 3 cases
  2. Construction and real estate €234,153 4 % · 1 case
  3. Chemicals and pharmaceuticals €200,913 4 % · 1 case
  4. Other €164,216 3 % · 1 case
  5. Food and agriculture €77,245 1 % · 2 cases
  6. Retail and e-commerce — 0 % · 1 case

When?

per quarter, by date of decision
Trend
PeriodCasesTotal
Q3 20230—
Q4 20230—
Q1 20241—
Q2 20240—
Q3 20240—
Q4 20240—
Q1 20250—
Q2 20250—
Q3 20250—
Q4 20253€278,158
Q1 20262€1m
Q2 20260—
Q3 20263€4.26m

9 cases

22 Sep 2026 Southern WaterSouthern Water: 2.4 million GBP fine for sewage and diesel pollution in Kent United KingdomEmissions and permits €2.9m

Between 2019 and 2021, untreated sewage, sewage residues, diesel from a generator and waste entered a stream and the sea around Faversham and Whitstable; the circumstances of one incident were not reported to the Environment Agency, around 70 fish died, and bathing warnings were in place at beaches in Tankerton and Herne Bay for almost a week. The court imposed a fine of 2,416,666.67 GBP, 69,894.04 GBP in costs and a 190 GBP victim surcharge; it was the company's second conviction that year (announcement of 22 September 2026, exact date of judgment not stated).

What organisations can take from it

Repeated pollution and failure to report incidents lead to a series of prosecutions with rising fines.

Relevance to training and awareness

Reporting environmental incidents to the regulator

Authority / court
Bromley Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Regulations 12(1)(b) und 38(1)(a) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Repeat case
yes
Published
22 Sep 2026

Original amount 2,486,750.71 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Sep 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.

8 Sep 2026 United Utilities Water LimitedUnited Utilities: record fine of 900,000 GBP after sewage flood on the Fylde coast United KingdomEmissions and permits €1.12m

Following a partial pipe collapse at the Fleetwood wastewater treatment works, untreated sewage flowed from three pumping stations into the Irish Sea for over 35 hours in June 2023; seven bathing waters were affected and shellfish beds were closed. The water company pleaded guilty to five offences and must pay a fine of 900,000 GBP, 62,225 GBP in costs and a 2,000 GBP victim surcharge.

What organisations can take from it

The condition and redundancy of critical wastewater infrastructure are a permit obligation; the Environment Agency assessed the failure as reckless and in the highest harm category.

Authority / court
Preston Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Regulation 38(2) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Culpability
negligent
Mitigating circumstances
Around 38 million GBP invested in response and repair, and a voluntary payment of 250,000 GBP to Blackpool Council.
Published
8 Sep 2026

Original amount 964,225 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 8 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.

3 Sep 2026 BDW Trading (Barratt Redrow)Barratt Redrow subsidiary BDW pays 201,500 GBP to environmental projects after silt entered brooks United KingdomEmissions and permits €234,153

At the Ladden Garden Village construction site in Yate, a subcontractor washed silt from the site drainage into two brooks over six days in July 2022. The Environment Agency accepted an Enforcement Undertaking: BDW is paying 201,500 GBP to three environmental and charitable projects, bears the investigation costs and had already invested over 180,000 GBP in remediation, training and improved surface water management.

What organisations can take from it

Developers are liable for environmental damage caused by their subcontractors; clear procedures and training on handling surface water prevent costly proceedings.

Relevance to training and awareness

Protecting watercourses on construction sites and managing subcontractors

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Environment Agency
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Environmental Civil Sanctions (England) Order 2010 (Enforcement Undertaking)
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Construction and real estate
Mitigating circumstances
Acceptance of responsibility, remediation, training of employees and application for a discharge permit.
Published
3 Sep 2026

Original amount 201,500 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 3 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 Mar 2026 3R Technology UK Ltd3R Technology UK: penalty for exporting contaminated plastic waste despite prohibition United KingdomWaste and hazardous substances €164,216

From 2022 to 2025, the company exported containers of supposedly clean plastic that was in fact contaminated with electronic waste such as cables and circuit boards; in some cases, the waste was hidden at the back of the container, and further containers were shipped despite prohibition notices from August 2024. The company and its director pleaded guilty to 16 counts: a fine of 80,000 GBP, 45,000 GBP in costs and a 2,000 GBP surcharge for the company; 120 hours of community service, 15,000 GBP in costs and a 114 GBP surcharge for the director.

What organisations can take from it

Incorrectly declared waste exports are detected during port inspections; those who ignore regulatory prohibitions also risk the personal conviction of management.

Relevance to training and awareness

Correct classification and declaration of waste for export

Authority / court
Preston Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances
Legal basis
Vorschriften zur grenzüberschreitenden Abfallverbringung (Notifizierung und Zustimmung); Verstoß gegen Untersagungsverfügungen
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Other
Culpability
intentional
Repeat case
yes
Mitigating circumstances
Guilty plea.
Liability of senior managers
Director Yulin Wang personally sentenced to 120 hours of community service, 15,000 GBP in costs and a 114 GBP surcharge.
Published
2 Apr 2026

Original amount 142,114 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 24 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.

23 Feb 2026 Yorkshire Water Services LimitedYorkshire Water: 733,333 GBP fine for repeated sewage discharges into park brook United KingdomEmissions and permits €839,630

Between October 2018 and August 2019, untreated sewage entered a brook in Pools Brook Country Park on three occasions – due to a burst rising main, a blockage caused by wet wipes and a failing pipe coupling; during the first incident, fish died in the park lake. Yorkshire Water had already pleaded guilty in January 2024 and had not attended any of the interviews; the court imposed a fine of 733,333 GBP plus costs.

What organisations can take from it

After a first incident, the cause at the site must be remedied permanently; repeated discharges from the same pipe lead to high fines.

Authority / court
Derby Crown Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Regulations 12(1)(b) und 38(1)(a) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Energy and utilities
Culpability
negligent
Repeat case
yes
Published
23 Feb 2026

Original amount 733,333 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 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.

11 Nov 2025 Devro (Scotland) LimitedDevro (Scotland): 48,000 GBP fine for discharging industrial wastewater into burn United KingdomEmissions and permits €58,610

In July 2021, a blockage in the foul sewer at the Moodiesburn plant (collagen casings for sausages) caused untreated industrial wastewater to back up into the surface water system, polluting the Bothlin Burn with ammonia and organic load. The company pleaded guilty on 11 November 2025; on 24 March 2026, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) reported a fine of 48,000 GBP plus a 3,600 GBP victim surcharge.

What organisations can take from it

On-site drainage needs monitoring and maintenance so that faults in the foul sewer do not reach watercourses via surface water pipes.

Authority / court
Airdrie Sheriff Court (Ermittlungen: SEPA, Anklage: Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Regulations 4 und 44(1)(a) Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2011; Section 20(3)(a) Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Act 2003
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Food and agriculture
Published
24 Mar 2026

Original amount 51,600 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 11 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.

28 Oct 2025 ExxonMobil Chemical LimitedExxonMobil Chemical: 176,000 GBP fine for six days of continuous flaring in Fife United KingdomEmissions and permits €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.

What organisations can take from it

Emergency plans only protect if staff apply them consistently in an emergency – regular drills are part of permit compliance.

Relevance to training and awareness

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.

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 Oct 2025 Manor Farm Dairy LtdManor Farm Dairy: fine after slurry overflow into stream near Dorchester United KingdomEmissions and permits €18,635

In March 2024, cattle slurry ran from the dairy farm's lagoons into a stream, seriously damaging it over more than 2 km, with effects up to 4.5 km downstream. The court imposed a fine of 6,000 GBP (reduced from 9,000 GBP because of an early guilty plea) and 10,158.50 GBP in costs; the Environment Agency described the incident as avoidable.

What organisations can take from it

Farms must maintain sufficient slurry storage capacity and monitor lagoons.

Authority / court
Taunton Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
Legal basis
Regulations 12(1)(b) und 38(1)(a) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Food and agriculture
Culpability
negligent
Mitigating circumstances
Early guilty plea (fine reduced from 9,000 to 6,000 GBP).
Published
13 Oct 2025

Original amount 16,158.5 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 8 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 Mar 2024 ASOS; Boohoo; George at AsdaCMA: ASOS, Boohoo and George at Asda commit to clear environmental claims United KingdomMisleading environmental and sustainability claims Other

Following an investigation into their fashion environmental claims, the three retailers gave formal undertakings to the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA): no vague terms such as ‘eco’ or ‘responsible’, clear information on recycled and organic content, transparent criteria for green ranges, correct filters and information on labels, and regular reports to the CMA. No breach of law was established.

What organisations can take from it

Sustainability labels in online shops must be specific, verifiable and easy for customers to understand; blanket terms are not sufficient.

Relevance to training and awareness

Wording of environmental claims in marketing and online shops

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Environment and sustainability · Misleading environmental and sustainability claims
Legal basis
Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (förmliche Verpflichtungszusagen)
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Published
27 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.

Ready for training that sticks?

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

Start free trial