Who was sanctioned, and for what?

The engine manufacturer programmed the engine software so that emission controls were reduced or switched off during normal driving (around 630,000 heavy-duty pickups of one vehicle maker 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.

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.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 10 Jan 2026 · Direct link

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). According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2026, the company had around 3,109 employees.

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

Employees

1,000 to 9,999

Repeat case

yes

Published

22 Sep 2026

Original amount 2,486,750.71 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Sep 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link

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.

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

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. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2026, the company had around 6,678 full-time equivalent employees.

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

Employees

1,000 to 9,999

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 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link

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. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2025, the company had around 5,217 employees.

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

Employees

1,000 to 9,999

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 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link

On board the MSC Samira III, oily bilge water was pumped overboard via the sewage tank, bypassing the oily water separator, in 2024/2025; the oil content monitoring was manipulated and the oil record book, which was presented to the Coast Guard in Philadelphia, was falsified. 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.

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

Published

28 Aug 2026

Original amount 1,750,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 Aug 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link

The Supreme Court of New South Wales, on application by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC, Australia's corporate, markets and financial services regulator), imposed penalties totalling 7.3 million AUD on the fund manager: 2.3 million AUD for misleading statements (s 12DF ASIC Act) and 5 million AUD for breaching its duty of care and diligence as responsible entity (s 601FC(1)(b) Corporations Act). Between October 2019 and May 2024 the Diversified Social Aspirations Fund, marketed as socially responsible, held through underlying funds interests in companies that derived revenue from fossil fuels, among others, even though the product documents promised certain exclusions and ongoing monitoring; the company did not respond to investor concerns by amending its statements.

Authority / court

Supreme Court of New South Wales (auf Antrag der Australian Securities and Investments Commission, ASIC)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Misleading environmental and sustainability claims

Legal basis

ASIC Act 2001 (Cth) s 12DF (Geldbuße nach s 12GBB); Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 601FC(1)(b) (Geldbuße nach s 1317G)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Culpability

negligent

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

Admissions, cooperation throughout the proceedings and contrition; since the proceedings began, an independent review of the product documents; no previous court findings.

Liability of senior managers

According to the agreed facts, senior management was involved (the company's then Executive Chair and Head of Investments).

Published

12 Aug 2026

Original amount 7,300,000 AUD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 11 Aug 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The Oberlandesgericht (OLG, Higher Regional Court) Linz added a forfeiture of 375,000 EUR to the conviction of a limited company under the Verbandsverantwortlichkeitsgesetz (VbVG, Austrian Corporate Criminal Liability Act) for intentionally handling and moving waste in a way that endangered the environment; the suspended corporate fine of 30 daily rates of 500 EUR (15,000 EUR) imposed by the Landesgericht (Regional Court) Salzburg remained in place. From May 2021 to May 2024 and again from May 2025 to February 2026, contrary to the AWG 2002 (Waste Management Act) and partly to an official decision, the company had excavated soil, construction waste, asphalt and concrete rubble accepted for payment and deposited on a plot; removal costs were put at around 3.24 million EUR. Only the forfeiture of EUR 375,000 is recorded as the amount; the corporate fine of EUR 15,000 was conditionally suspended.

Authority / court

Oberlandesgericht Linz (Berufung gegen Urteil des Landesgerichts Salzburg vom 06.03.2026)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances

Legal basis

§ 181b Abs. 1 und 2 StGB; §§ 3, 4 Abs. 1 und 3, § 6 Abs. 1, § 14 Abs. 1 VbVG; § 20 Abs. 3 StGB; AWG 2002

Action

Disgorgement of profits

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Other

Culpability

intentional

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

No previous convictions of the company; rather low environmental risk. Further circumstances taken into account by the court concern a natural person and are not reported here.

Liability of senior managers

Under the VbVG, the company's liability is linked to the conduct of its managing director.

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Canterbury Crown Court fined Southern Water £7,127,083 for 13 breaches of the Environmental Permitting Regulations 2016, plus £149,000 in prosecution costs and a £181 victim surcharge. Between 2019 and 2021, failed pumps and poorly maintained equipment at the Margate and Broadstairs pumping stations led to several discharges of untreated sewage into the sea, some of which were reported only the next day or weeks later; beaches had to be closed. The company also admitted 35 further unlawful discharges from the same period.

Authority / court

Canterbury Crown Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits

Legal basis

Reg. 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

17 Jul 2026

Original amount 7,127,083 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 Jul 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The EPA, the US Department of Justice and West Virginia's environmental agency reached a settlement (consent decree) with Chemours over PFAS discharges into the Cape Fear, Delaware and Ohio rivers, some made without and some in breach of discharge permits, together with TSCA and RCRA violations at four plants. Chemours will pay a civil penalty of 22,500,000 USD in three annual instalments of 7,500,000 USD and carry out remedial measures, including drinking water supply, PFAS controls and a USD 90m mitigation programme, which the EPA puts at over USD 450m in total. The settlement was lodged with the court on 24 June 2026 and is subject to public comment and court approval. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment. The decision is not final.

Authority / court

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) / U.S. Department of Justice mit West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (U.S. District Court, Southern District of West Virginia)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits

Legal basis

Clean Water Act (NPDES); Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; Toxic Substances Control Act; West Virginia Water Pollution Control Act

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

not yet final

Sector

Chemicals and pharmaceuticals

Mitigating circumstances

The civil penalty was set on the basis of the company's ability to pay.

Published

24 Jun 2026

Original amount 22,500,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 24 Jun 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The EPA (Region 6) issued a Consent Agreement and Final Order against Denka Performance Elastomer over RCRA violations at its neoprene plant in LaPlace (Louisiana): missing waste determinations, breaches of land disposal restrictions and treatment and storage of hazardous waste without a permit. Denka will pay 996,703.35 USD and must clean out a brine pit and its ancillary equipment; if the currently idle plant resumes operations, further requirements apply, including on waste inventory, containers, training and protective equipment. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

Authority / court

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 6

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances

Legal basis

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Docket RCRA-06-2025-0910

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Chemicals and pharmaceuticals

Repeat case

yes

Published

2 Jul 2026

Original amount 996,703.35 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 Jun 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Økokrim (Norwegian National Authority for Investigation and Prosecution of Economic and Environmental Crime) issued an industrial company producing silicon carbide with a penalty notice of NOK 18,000,000 for breaches of the Pollution Control Act (forurensningsloven) and for giving incorrect information to Miljødirektoratet (Norwegian Environment Agency). In Økokrim's view, the air emission measurements in 2021 were not representative because, among other things, production was lower during the measurement campaigns; this created a risk that considerably more of the carcinogenic benzo[a]pyrene was emitted than permitted. The company has accepted the penalty notice.

Authority / court

Økokrim

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits

Legal basis

Forurensningsloven (Umweltschutzgesetz); falsche Angaben gegenüber Miljødirektoratet

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Culpability

intentional

Liability of senior managers

According to Økokrim, managers took the decisions on the non-representative measurements knowing that they would not reflect actual emissions.

Published

18 Jun 2026

Original amount 18,000,000 NOK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 18 Jun 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

Scotland's environmental regulator SEPA imposed two civil penalties of £35,000 each (£70,000 in total) on salmon processor Scottish Sea Farms. Two ice plants at the Gremista site in Lerwick (Shetland) contained fluorinated greenhouse gases above the threshold of 500 tonnes of CO2 equivalent but had no working leak detection system.

Authority / court

Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits

Legal basis

Fluorinated Greenhouse Gases Regulations 2015; Verordnung (EU) Nr. 517/2014

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Food and agriculture

Mitigating circumstances

The company has since brought the equipment into compliance.

Published

27 May 2026

Original amount 70,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 May 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

In April 2026 China Harbour Engineering Company Limited was fined 78,000 HKD at the Eastern Magistrates' Courts (a Hong Kong magistrates' court) under the Water Pollution Control Ordinance (Hong Kong's water pollution law) because the company had discharged waste or polluting matter into a water control zone on 14 July 2025; the prosecution was brought by the Environmental Protection Department (Hong Kong's environmental authority). It was the highest fine among the 40 environmental convictions the department published for April 2026.

Authority / court

Eastern Magistrates' Courts, Hongkong (Anklage: Environmental Protection Department)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits

Legal basis

Water Pollution Control Ordinance (Einleitung von Abfall oder verunreinigenden Stoffen in eine water control zone)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Construction and real estate

Published

22 May 2026

Original amount 78,000 HKD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 May 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

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.

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

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.

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

Pyrolysis oil leaked twice at the Lavéra petrochemical site in Martigues: around 50 tonnes in July 2018 through a failed seal into the Anse d'Auguette, part of which reached the sea, and around one tonne in April 2022 through a corroded seawater pipe, of which some 500 kg reached the Anse d'Auguette. Naphtachimie therefore concluded an environmental CJIP (convention judiciaire d'intérêt public, French deferred prosecution agreement) with the Marseille public prosecutor; it pays a public interest fine of 1,200,000 EUR, compensates two environmental associations and will trial, at its own expense, a biological clean-up of the Anse d'Auguette; validated on 13 May 2026.

Authority / court

Parquet de Marseille (Procureur de la République); Validierung durch den Präsidenten des Tribunal judiciaire de Marseille

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits

Legal basis

Art. 41-1-3 Code de procédure pénale (pollution des eaux)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Chemicals and pharmaceuticals

Published

26 May 2026

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

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.

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.

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

In two incidents in July and August 2022 around 423,000 litres of untreated sewage escaped in Carramar because plant had not been properly maintained, affecting a residential property, a sports field, bushland and Prospect Creek. After a guilty plea, the Land and Environment Court convicted Sydney Water and imposed AUD 225,000 for breaching its environment protection licence and AUD 15,000 for failing without lawful excuse to provide CCTV footage requested by the EPA.

Authority / court

NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA NSW) / Land and Environment Court of NSW

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits

Legal basis

Bedingungen der Environment Protection Licence; Pflicht zur Vorlage von Informationen und Unterlagen gegenüber der EPA NSW

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Energy and utilities

Mitigating circumstances

25% discount for an early guilty plea.

Published

7 May 2026

Original amount 240,000 AUD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 7 May 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

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 pleaded guilty and was fined 80,000 GBP; in addition, it was ordered to pay 45,000 GBP in costs and a 2,000 GBP surcharge. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2025, the company had around 19 employees.

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

Employees

Under 50

Culpability

intentional

Repeat case

yes

Mitigating circumstances

Guilty plea.

Published

2 Apr 2026

Original amount 80,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 24 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 5 · Direct link