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 sectorAll sectors
- Automotive €4.2bn 97 % · 8 cases
- Steel and metals €64.9m 2 % · 6 cases
- Financial services and insurance €34.1m 1 % · 2 cases
- Energy and utilities €4.86m 0 % · 4 cases
- Transport, logistics and shipping €3.52m 0 % · 5 cases
- Chemicals and pharmaceuticals €1.51m 0 % · 3 cases
- Retail and e-commerce €1m 0 % · 2 cases
- Construction and real estate €234,153 0 % · 1 case
- Other €171,066 0 % · 3 cases
- Food and agriculture €77,245 0 % · 4 cases
- 2 more€25,217
When?
per quarter, by date of decision| Period | Cases | Total |
|---|---|---|
| Q3 2023 | 1 | €17.9m |
| Q4 2023 | 0 | — |
| Q1 2024 | 3 | €1.53bn |
| Q2 2024 | 1 | — |
| Q3 2024 | 3 | €11.9m |
| Q4 2024 | 3 | €16.3m |
| Q1 2025 | 3 | €2.49bn |
| Q2 2025 | 2 | €285,610 |
| Q3 2025 | 5 | €2.73m |
| Q4 2025 | 6 | €302,903 |
| Q1 2026 | 5 | €2.32m |
| Q2 2026 | 3 | €231.2m |
| Q3 2026 | 5 | €6.51m |
40 cases
10 Jan 2024 Cummins Inc.Cummins: 1.675 billion USD civil penalty for defeat devices in Ram pickups €1.53bn
The engine manufacturer programmed the engine software so that emission controls were reduced or switched off during normal driving (around 630,000 Ram 2500/3500 vehicles from model years 2013–2019) and failed to disclose auxiliary emission control devices in a further approximately 330,000 vehicles. Civil penalty of 1.675 billion USD – the highest ever under the Clean Air Act – plus recall and mitigation measures, totalling around 2 billion USD.
Software functions that affect emissions behaviour must be fully disclosed in the type approval process.
- Authority / court
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency / U.S. Department of Justice (U.S. District Court, District of Columbia)
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
- Legal basis
- Clean Air Act
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Automotive
- Employees
- 10,000 or more
Original amount 1,675,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Jan 2024.
- 2024 Cummins Inc. Vehicle Emission Control Violations Settlement Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
22 Sep 2026 Southern WaterSouthern Water: 2.4 million GBP fine for sewage and diesel pollution in Kent €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).
Repeated pollution and failure to report incidents lead to a series of prosecutions with rising fines.
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.
- Southern Water fined £2.4m for Kent pollution Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
10 Sep 2026 Algoma Steel Inc.Algoma Steel: 1.2 million CAD fine for gear oil in the St. Marys River €747,710
In June 2022, a gear oil tank overflowed at the steelworks in Sault Ste. Marie; an estimated 1,000 to 1,250 litres of oil entered the St. Marys River, harmful to fish and migratory birds. The company pleaded guilty to two counts and is paying 1.2 million CAD into the Environmental Damages Fund; its name is listed in the Environmental Offenders Registry.
Even small tank overflows near watercourses lead to fines in the millions – overfill protection and containment systems are mandatory.
Filling and monitoring oil tanks
- Authority / court
- Ontario Court of Justice, Sault Ste. Marie (Ermittlungen: Environment and Climate Change Canada)
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances
- Legal basis
- Fisheries Act, Subsection 36(3); Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994, Subsection 5.1(1)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Steel and metals
- Mitigating circumstances
- Guilty plea.
- Published
- 11 Sep 2026
Original amount 1,200,000 CAD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Sep 2026.
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
8 Sep 2026 United Utilities Water LimitedUnited Utilities: record fine of 900,000 GBP after sewage flood on the Fylde coast €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.
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.
- Water company fined record £900k after coastline sewage spill Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
3 Sep 2026 BDW Trading (Barratt Redrow)Barratt Redrow subsidiary BDW pays 201,500 GBP to environmental projects after silt entered brooks €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.
Developers are liable for environmental damage caused by their subcontractors; clear procedures and training on handling surface water prevent costly proceedings.
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.
- Builder pays £201,500 to charities after silting watercourses Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
28 Aug 2026 MSC Shipmanagement Limited; Hong Kong Spirit Shipping and Trading LimitedMSC Shipmanagement: 1.75 million USD fine for secretly discharging oily bilge water €1.5m
On board the MSC Samira III, senior engineering officers had oily bilge water pumped overboard via the sewage tank, bypassing the oily water separator, in 2024/2025, manipulated the oil content monitoring and falsified the oil record book, which was presented to the Coast Guard in Philadelphia. The operator and the owner each pleaded guilty to two counts under the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships (APPS) and are paying a combined 1.75 million USD; in addition, there are four years of probation.
Shipping companies must actively monitor practice on board and the oil record book, because instructions given by individual officers are attributed to the company under criminal law.
MARPOL obligations on board, oil record book and reporting channels for crews
- Authority / court
- U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Anklage: DOJ Environment and Natural Resources Division)
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances
- Legal basis
- Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships (APPS), 33 U.S.C. § 1908
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Transport, logistics and shipping
- Employees
- 10,000 or more
- Culpability
- intentional
- Liability of senior managers
- Second Engineer Mikhail Tsurikov also pleaded guilty; sentencing scheduled for 10 September 2026.
- Published
- 28 Aug 2026
Original amount 1,750,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 Aug 2026.
- International Shipping Companies Sentenced to Pay $1.75 Million Fine for Concealing Discharges of Oily Waste into Ocean Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
18 May 2026 Volvo Group North America, LLCVolvo Group North America: settlement of around 197 million USD over undisclosed emission control devices €168.7m
Around 10,000 heavy-duty Volvo diesel engines from model years 2010 to 2016 used auxiliary emission control devices (AECDs) that were not disclosed during certification and emitted more NOx than permitted. The settlement with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) comprises 17.5 million USD in penalties and costs, 71 million USD for mitigation measures and 108 million USD for emission reduction projects in California.
Every emissions-relevant control function must be fully disclosed in the certification application; otherwise high settlement payments may follow years later.
- Authority / court
- California Air Resources Board (CARB)
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
- Legal basis
- Kalifornische Emissions- und Zertifizierungsvorschriften für schwere Nutzfahrzeugmotoren
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Automotive
- Employees
- 10,000 or more
- Mitigating circumstances
- Cooperation during the investigation; recall and extended warranty for engines from model years 2014 to 2016.
- Published
- 18 May 2026
Original amount 196,500,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 18 May 2026.
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
15 May 2026 ArcelorMittal Exploitation Minière Canada s.e.n.c.ArcelorMittal mining subsidiary in Québec: 100 million CAD fine for acidic mine effluent €62.5m
From May 2014 to May 2022, acidic effluent, effluent with elevated zinc, nickel or suspended solids content, and effluent that was acutely lethal to fish entered fish-bearing waters from the Mont-Wright mining complex and the Fire Lake mine in the Fermont region. The company pleaded guilty to 100 counts; the fine of 100 million CAD goes almost entirely to the Environmental Damages Fund, and an action plan on wastewater management must also be submitted by mid-February 2027.
Long-standing exceedances of limit values add up to hundreds of individual offences; effluent monitoring must lead to immediate corrective action.
- 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, Subsection 36(3)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Steel and metals
- Published
- 15 May 2026
Original amount 100,000,000 CAD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 May 2026.
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
8 May 2026 Transport Desgagnés Inc.Transport Desgagnés: 40,000 CAD because a tanker entered an Arctic protected area without a permit €24,902
The tanker M/T Sarah Desgagnés, operated by the company, entered the Akpait National Wildlife Area in Nunavut on 29 September and 6 October 2024 without the required access permit. The Nunavut Court of Justice imposed 40,000 CAD for the Environmental Damages Fund; the company must publish a notice in a local newspaper and is listed in the Environmental Offenders Registry.
Protected area boundaries belong in every vessel's voyage planning; missing access permits are prosecuted even in remote areas.
Protected areas in voyage planning and bridge practice
- Authority / court
- Nunavut Court of Justice (Ermittlungen: Environment and Climate Change Canada)
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability
- Legal basis
- Wildlife Area Regulations (Canada Wildlife Act), Paragraph 3.3(1)(h)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Transport, logistics and shipping
- Published
- 8 May 2026
Original amount 40,000 CAD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 8 May 2026.
- Transport Desgagnés Inc. fined $40,000 for Canada Wildlife Act violations in Nunavut Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
24 Mar 2026 3R Technology UK Ltd3R Technology UK: penalty for exporting contaminated plastic waste despite prohibition €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.
Incorrectly declared waste exports are detected during port inspections; those who ignore regulatory prohibitions also risk the personal conviction of management.
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.
- Lancashire company and director fined for illegal exports Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
23 Feb 2026 Yorkshire Water Services LimitedYorkshire Water: 733,333 GBP fine for repeated sewage discharges into park brook €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.
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.
- Yorkshire Water fined £733k after polluting country park stream Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
13 Feb 2026 B GmbH (in der Entscheidung anonymisiert)LVwG Lower Austria: penalty for exceeding permitted waste volumes reduced €6,000
A treatment facility for non-hazardous waste was permitted for a maximum of 150,000 t of annual deliveries and 60,000 t of storage, but accepted around 188,000 t and 224,000 t in 2021 and 2022 respectively and at times stored 173,000 t. The Lower Austria Regional Administrative Court (Landesverwaltungsgericht Niederösterreich, LVwG) upheld the penalty imposed on the responsible officer for modifying the facility without a permit but reduced the fine from 8,400 to 6,000 EUR (LVwG-S-1039/004-2024).
Permitted throughput and storage volumes are binding; those who accept more are modifying the facility in a way that requires a permit and are personally liable as the responsible officer.
Monitoring permitted volumes and capacities in plant operation
- Authority / court
- Landesverwaltungsgericht Niederösterreich (Straferkenntnis der Bezirkshauptmannschaft Baden)
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances
- Legal basis
- § 79 Abs. 1 Z 9 i. V. m. § 37 Abs. 3 Z 5 AWG 2002; § 9 Abs. 2 VStG i. V. m. § 26 Abs. 6 AWG 2002
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- reduced
- Sector
- Other
- Repeat case
- yes
- Mitigating circumstances
- Disproportionately long proceedings (§ 34 (2) StGB, Austrian Criminal Code) as the only mitigating factor; the officer's relevant previous convictions were an aggravating factor.
- Liability of senior managers
- The penalty was imposed on the company's responsible officer appointed under § 9 (2) VStG.
- LVwG Niederösterreich, 13.02.2026, LVwG-S-1039/004-2024 Court decision
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
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
17 Dec 2025 Beausite Métal inc.Beausite Métal: 40,000 CAD because PCB equipment was not disposed of despite an order €24,745
The metal recycler in Val-des-Sources had received an environmental protection compliance order to dispose of and destroy PCB-contaminated equipment. At a follow-up inspection in May 2024, the equipment was still on the site; the company pleaded guilty under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA 1999) and was fined 40,000 CAD.
Regulatory orders need an owner and a date in the calendar – non-compliance is a separate offence.
- Authority / court
- Court of Québec (Anklage: Environment and Climate Change Canada)
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances
- Legal basis
- Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Steel and metals
- Published
- 18 Dec 2025
Original amount 40,000 CAD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 Dec 2025.
- Beausite Métal inc. fined $40,000 for failing to comply with an environmental protection compliance order Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
16 Dec 2025 A AG / V-Konzern (in der amtlichen Mitteilung anonymisiert)BGH: fraud convictions of former managers in diesel scandal final Custodial sentence
The Munich II Regional Court (Landgericht München II) had sentenced a head of department in diesel engine development and a former head of powertrain development for fraud in 94,924 cases to one year and nine months and two years respectively, and the former CEO of A AG for fraud in 17,177 cases to one year and nine months, in each case suspended on probation. They were responsible for unlawful defeat devices or failed to intervene despite having knowledge of them; the loss to buyers amounted to around 2.32 billion EUR. Germany's Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof, BGH) dismissed the appeals on points of law (1 StR 270/24).
Board members who learn of defeat devices and do not act commit a criminal offence themselves – indications of rule violations must immediately lead to investigation and information for customers.
Dealing with non-compliant instructions in development and the duty to intervene
- Authority / court
- Bundesgerichtshof (1. Strafsenat); Vorinstanz Landgericht München II (Urteil vom 27.06.2023)
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits
- Legal basis
- § 263 StGB (Betrug); unzulässige Abschalteinrichtungen nach US- und EU-Zulassungsrecht
- Action
- Custodial sentence
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Automotive
- Culpability
- intentional
- Mitigating circumstances
- Prison sentences suspended on probation in each case.
- Liability of senior managers
- Those convicted were a head of department (P.), a former head of powertrain development and later board member (H.), and the former CEO of A AG (S.), who took no action despite the serious possibility of further defeat devices.
- Published
- 19 Dec 2025
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
11 Nov 2025 Devro (Scotland) LimitedDevro (Scotland): 48,000 GBP fine for discharging industrial wastewater into burn €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.
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.
- Sausage casing firm fined £48,000 for polluting North Lanarkshire burn with industrial effluent Press release 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
Report an error
23 Oct 2025 TotalEnergies; TotalEnergies Electricité et Gaz de FranceParis Judicial Court: TotalEnergies advertising on climate neutrality misleading Order
In an action brought by Greenpeace France, Les Amis de la Terre and Notre Affaire à Tous, the Paris Judicial Court (Tribunal judiciaire de Paris, 34th chamber) found that TotalEnergies had advertised on totalenergies.fr with the goal of ‘carbon neutrality by 2050’ and its role as a player in the energy transition without disclosing that oil and gas production continues to be expanded – a misleading commercial practice. The court ordered the communication to cease, damages to be paid to the associations and the operative part of the judgment to be published on the website (RG 22/02955); claims relating to gas and agrofuels were dismissed.
Net-zero targets may only be advertised to consumers with reference to the actual business strategy.
Climate targets in consumer communication
- Authority / court
- Tribunal judiciaire de Paris (34. Kammer)
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Misleading environmental and sustainability claims
- Legal basis
- Art. L121-1 ff. Code de la consommation (Umsetzung der Richtlinie 2005/29/EG)
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Energy and utilities
- Employees
- 10,000 or more
- Published
- 23 Oct 2025
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
8 Oct 2025 Manor Farm Dairy LtdManor Farm Dairy: fine after slurry overflow into stream near Dorchester €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.
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.
- Manor Farm Dairy in Dorset fined for slurry polluting river Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link