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 countryWhat for?
by topicWho?
by sectorAll sectors
When?
per quarter, by date of decision| Period | Cases | Total |
|---|---|---|
| Q3 2023 | 0 | — |
| Q4 2023 | 0 | — |
| Q1 2024 | 1 | — |
| Q2 2024 | 1 | — |
| Q3 2024 | 0 | — |
| Q4 2024 | 1 | — |
| Q1 2025 | 0 | — |
| Q2 2025 | 0 | — |
| Q3 2025 | 3 | €1m |
| Q4 2025 | 2 | — |
| Q1 2026 | 1 | €6,000 |
| Q2 2026 | 0 | — |
| Q3 2026 | 0 | — |
9 cases
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
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
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
26 Aug 2025 Acqua Minerale San Benedetto S.p.A.AGCM: San Benedetto removes ‘CO2 neutral’ claim on Ecogreen bottles Other
Labels, the website and commercials for the Ecogreen line claimed that bottle production caused no greenhouse gas emissions and even had a positive effect on the environment. Following an intervention by Italy's competition and consumer protection authority (Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato, AGCM) (moral suasion, case PS12596), the mineral water producer removed the claim ‘impatto zero CO2’ in mid-July 2025, revised nature motifs and added a QR code linking to sustainability information.
‘Zero emissions’ promises on packaging can hardly be substantiated; it is better to present specific reduction steps transparently.
Climate claims on packaging
- Authority / court
- Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Misleading environmental and sustainability claims
- Legal basis
- Codice del Consumo (unlautere Geschäftspraktiken), Verfahren PS12596
- Action
- Other
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Food and agriculture
- Mitigating circumstances
- Voluntary amendment of all labels and advertising materials following the authority's intervention.
- Published
- 26 Aug 2025
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
4 Aug 2025 Infinite Styles Services Co. Ltd (Shein)AGCM: 1 million EUR fine against Shein for misleading environmental claims €1m
Italy's competition and consumer protection authority (Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato, AGCM) objected to vague and in part false claims about circular design and recyclability, about the ‘green’ evoluSHEIN collection (only a small share of the range) and about emission targets, while emissions rose in 2023/2024. The ultra-fast-fashion model is subject to a heightened duty of care, the authority held; it imposed 1 million EUR (case PS12709).
Communicate climate targets and recycling promises only if they are specific, substantiated and consistent with actual developments.
Verifiable sustainability communication in online retail
- Authority / court
- Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Misleading environmental and sustainability claims
- Legal basis
- Codice del Consumo (unlautere Geschäftspraktiken), Verfahren PS12709
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Retail and e-commerce
- Employees
- 10,000 or more
- Published
- 4 Aug 2025
- PS12709 - Italian Competition Authority: 1 million euros fine imposed on Shein for misleading and omissive green claims Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
31 Jul 2025 B KG (in der Entscheidung anonymisiert)LVwG Lower Austria: penalty for illegal acceptance of 258 t of waste from Hungary upheld €850
In September 2022, the KG (limited partnership) accepted 257.78 tonnes of wastewater from the glycerine treatment of a Hungarian biodiesel plant which, because of its methanol content (2.2 %), was subject to notification as hazardous waste but was shipped to Austria without notification and consent. The Lower Austria Regional Administrative Court (Landesverwaltungsgericht Niederösterreich, LVwG) upheld the fine of 850 EUR against the partner authorised to represent the company, set aside the second count (collection without a permit) and discontinued the proceedings in that respect (LVwG-S-512/001-2025).
The recipient of cross-border waste must also check before acceptance whether the shipment has been notified and authorised – otherwise management is personally liable.
Checking notification requirements for cross-border waste deliveries
- Authority / court
- Landesverwaltungsgericht Niederösterreich (Straferkenntnis der Bezirkshauptmannschaft Wiener Neustadt)
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances
- Legal basis
- § 79 Abs. 1 Z 15b i. V. m. § 69 AWG 2002; Art. 2 Nr. 35 Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1013/2006 (Abfallverbringung); § 9 Abs. 1 VStG
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- reduced
- Sector
- Other
- Liability of senior managers
- The penalty was imposed on the partner with unlimited liability as the person appointed to represent the company externally under § 9 (1) VStG (Austrian Administrative Penal Act).
- LVwG Niederösterreich, 31.07.2025, LVwG-S-512/001-2025 Court decision
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
9 Oct 2024 Campello S.p.A.; Microlino Italia S.r.l.AGCM: providers of small electric cars remove ‘100 % green’ advertising Other
On the websites for the XEV YOYO and Microlino electric vehicles, the companies advertised with ‘100 % sustainable’, ‘100 % Green’, ‘zero emissions’ and ‘zero environmental impact’ without taking into account life-cycle phases or the emissions from electricity generation. Following an intervention by Italy's competition and consumer protection authority (Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato, AGCM) (moral suasion, PS12794/PS12819), the claims were removed.
Even for electric vehicles, absolute claims such as ‘zero emissions’ are misleading if manufacturing and electricity generation are left out.
Blanket environmental promises for electric products
- Authority / court
- Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Misleading environmental and sustainability claims
- Legal basis
- Codice del Consumo (unlautere Geschäftspraktiken), Verfahren PS12794 und PS12819
- Action
- Other
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Automotive
- Mitigating circumstances
- Voluntary removal of the claims following the authority's intervention.
- Published
- 9 Oct 2024
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
27 Jun 2024 BGH: advertising with ‘climate neutral’ only permissible with explanation in the advertisement itself Order
A manufacturer of fruit gums and liquorice (not named in the official press release) advertised in a trade journal that it had produced all its products ‘climate neutral’ since 2021, although this was achieved partly through offsetting. Germany's Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof, BGH) prohibited the advertising following an action brought by the Centre for Protection against Unfair Competition (Wettbewerbszentrale): ambiguous environmental terms must be explained in the advertisement itself, since reduction and offsetting are not equivalent.
Companies advertising with ‘climate neutral’ must explain directly in the advertisement whether emissions are avoided or merely offset.
Legally compliant environmental and climate claims in advertising
- Authority / court
- Bundesgerichtshof (I. Zivilsenat)
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Misleading environmental and sustainability claims
- Legal basis
- § 3 Abs. 1, § 5 Abs. 1, § 5a Abs. 1 und 3, § 8 Abs. 1 Satz 1 UWG (Az. I ZR 98/23)
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Food and agriculture
- Published
- 27 Jun 2024
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
20 Mar 2024 Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V. (KLM)Amsterdam District Court: KLM advertising on sustainable flying misleading Other
In a collective action brought by the Fossielvrij foundation, the Amsterdam District Court (Rechtbank Amsterdam) found that 15 KLM advertising claims were misleading and unlawful: they suggested sustainable flying or that offsetting products actually compensate for the climate impact, although biofuels and reforestation reduce it only marginally. KLM bears the costs of the proceedings; further claims were dismissed (ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2024:1512).
Offsetting and SAF offerings must not create the impression of climate-neutral travel; associations can challenge such claims in court.
Climate claims and offsetting offers in customer communication
- Authority / court
- Rechtbank Amsterdam
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Misleading environmental and sustainability claims
- Legal basis
- Wet oneerlijke handelspraktijken (Art. 6:193a ff. BW)
- Action
- Other
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Transport, logistics and shipping
- Employees
- 10,000 or more
- Published
- 20 Mar 2024
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link