Compliance Radar
Who was sanctioned, and for what?
Fines, court rulings and incidents from Europe, North America, Latin America, Asia-Pacific, Middle East and Africa: 2,207 cases from 44 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 topic- Misleading advertising and pricing €442.4m 98 % · 10 cases
- no topic €6.78m 2 % · 4 cases
- Information duties in online retail – 0 % · 2 cases
Who?
by company- Anonymised companies €423m 94 % · 4 cases
- Philip Morris Italia S.r.l. €7m 2 % · 1 case
- Società Cooperativa Culture (CoopCulture) €7m 2 % · 1 case
- Automobile Association Developments Limited (AA Driving School, BSM Driving School) €4.83m 1 % · 1 case
- Xponential Fitness, Inc. u. a. (Franchisegesellschaften der Marken AKT, BFT, Club Pilates, CycleBar, Pure Barre, Rumble, StretchLab, YogaSix) €3.43m 1 % · 1 case
- PPB Entertainment Limited, PPB Counterparty Services Limited, Betfair Casino Limited u. a. (4 Lizenznehmer, Paddy Power Betfair) €2.28m 1 % · 1 case
- Petfre (Gibraltar) Limited €1.04m 0 % · 1 case
- CityFitness Group Limited €565,485 0 % · 1 case
- Chiba Lotte Marines Co., Ltd. (株式会社千葉ロッテマリーンズ) – 0 % · 1 case
- Kinpodo Co., Ltd. (株式会社金宝堂) – 0 % · 1 case
- 1 more€0
When?
per year, by date of decision| Period | Cases | Total |
|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 2 | €423m |
| 2024 | 2 | €695 |
| 2025 | 5 | €9.28m |
| 2026 | 7 | €16.9m |
16 cases
18 Sep 2026 Kinpodo Co., Ltd. (株式会社金宝堂)Kinpodo: order over a bait price 'from 104,500 JPY' for family funerals Order
From March to May 2025, Kinpodo advertised family funerals in exclusively rented halls under the name 'Chiisana Mori no Ie' in television commercials at a price 'from 104,500 JPY'. In fact, apart from a few cases, customers had to pay at least 308,000 JPY; the order required a corrective notice, measures to prevent recurrence and cessation.
A 'from' price may only be advertised if customers can realistically obtain it.
'From' prices and bait offers
- Authority / court
- Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- Art. 7 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 2 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- Published
- 18 Sep 2026
- 株式会社金宝堂に対する景品表示法に基づく措置命令について (Eintrag, 18.09.2026) Press release of an authority
- News Release 18.09.2026 mit Maßnahmenanordnung 消表対第807号 (PDF) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
16 Jul 2026 BGH: online cancellation page must not offer a "pause contract" alternative Order
On the confirmation page of its online cancellation process, a gym operator displayed a highlighted notice with the button "Pause contract via self-service"; in addition, the confirmation button was labelled "Find contract", which the defendant had already acknowledged. In an action brought by the Federation of German Consumer Organisations (Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband), the BGH ruled that the confirmation page may only contain the information required for the cancellation and the confirmation button, set aside the judgment of the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf (OLG Düsseldorf) dismissing the action to that extent and ordered the operator to cease and desist.
Keep retention or pause offers off the confirmation page of the online cancellation process.
Design of the cancellation process (cancellation button, retention offers)
- Authority / court
- Bundesgerichtshof (I. Zivilsenat), Az. I ZR 200/25
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail
- Legal basis
- § 312k Abs. 1 Satz 1, Abs. 2 BGB (Kündigungsbutton)
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Other
- Published
- 16 Jul 2026
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
30 Jun 2026 Petfre (Gibraltar) LimitedPetfre (Gibraltar): £900,000 over inadequate customer interaction in online gambling €1.04m
Following a compliance assessment in May and June 2024, the operator of betfred.com will pay £900,000 in lieu of a financial penalty to the Consolidated Fund (the UK Government's general account) under a settlement and contribute to the Commission's investigation costs. The Commission found breaches of the remote customer interaction requirements under SRCP 3.4.3: automated processes to identify signs of harm and to act immediately on strong indicators were lacking, so that one customer lost a further £17,900 within 24 hours of a review without being contacted again. The Commission had already announced sanctions against Petfre in 2022 and 2025.
After a sanction, customer interaction must be improved lastingly and demonstrably, or the next case follows.
Lasting improvement of customer interaction after earlier sanctions
- Authority / court
- Gambling Commission
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail
- Legal basis
- s. 116 Gambling Act 2005; SRCP 3.4.3 Abs. 1, 2, 4, 7 und 11 der Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice (LCCP)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Other
- Repeat case
- yes
- Mitigating circumstances
- A swift action plan with progress updates and full cooperation with the investigation.
- Published
- 30 Jun 2026
Original amount 900,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 Jun 2026.
- Gambling Commission, Register of regulatory actions: Petfre (Gibraltar) Limited (Settlement 30.06.2026) Enforcement database of an authority
- Gambling Commission: Petfre (Gibraltar) Limited Public Statement Decision of an authority
- Gambling Commission: Petfre (Gibraltar) Limited to pay £900,000 for regulatory failures (30.06.2026) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
9 Jun 2026 Philip Morris Italia S.r.l.AGCM fines Philip Morris Italia €7m over "senza fumo" (smoke-free) advertising €7m
Philip Morris Italia widely promoted heated tobacco devices, e-cigarettes and nicotine products for oral use with phrases such as "senza fumo" (smoke-free) and a "smoke-free future"; the AGCM considered this misleading because it suggested that the products were harmless or less harmful, although they can endanger health and safety. The authority imposed a fine of 7,000,000 EUR and prohibited continuation; the proceedings were triggered by a report from the Ministry of Health.
Health-related advertising claims must be complete and substantiated, and a slogan such as "smoke-free" must not imply that a product is harmless.
Health-related advertising claims for tobacco and nicotine products
- Authority / court
- Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- Art. 20, 21 Abs. 1 und 3, 22 Codice del consumo (D.lgs. 206/2005)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- Published
- 10 Jun 2026
- AGCM, Provvedimento PS12940 (Adunanza 09.06.2026) Decision of an authority
- AGCM, Comunicato stampa 10.06.2026: PS12940 – Sanzione di 7 milioni a Philip Morris Italia S.r.l. Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
9 Jun 2026 Xponential Fitness, Inc. u. a. (Franchisegesellschaften der Marken AKT, BFT, Club Pilates, CycleBar, Pure Barre, Rumble, StretchLab, YogaSix)New York: Xponential Fitness pays 3.97 million USD over misleading franchise disclosures €3.43m
According to the Attorney General's office, the fitness franchisor stated three to six months until studio opening in the disclosure documents filed in New York, although it took more than 13 months on average and its own SEC reports showed longer periods. The Assurance of Discontinuance requires 3,971,250 USD: 3 million USD for 70 harmed franchisees (of which 300,000 USD is a civil penalty) and 971,250 USD in fee refunds to 25 franchisees who never opened. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.
Statements in franchise disclosures must match the company's own capital market reports – discrepancies count as evidence of deception.
Realistic statements in franchise disclosure documents
- Authority / court
- Office of the New York State Attorney General (Investor Protection Bureau, Franchise Section)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail
- Legal basis
- New York Franchise Sales Act (General Business Law §§ 680 ff., insb. § 687); Executive Law § 63(12)
- Action
- Disgorgement of profits
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Other
- Published
- 9 Jun 2026
Original amount 3,971,250 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Jun 2026.
- NY Attorney General press release: More Than $3.9 Million from Xponential Fitness for Misleading Franchise Owners Press release of an authority
- Assurance of Discontinuance, Xponential Fitness, Inc. et al. (2026) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
5 Jun 2026 CityFitness Group LimitedCityFitness: 1,120,000 NZD for a price rise disguised as a “transaction fee” €565,485
New Zealand's largest gym chain kept advertising a membership at 6.99 NZD a week on its website, Instagram and Google ads, although all new members had to pay a compulsory 3% surcharge that it presented as a “transaction fee” but which in fact served to raise revenue generally. After pleading guilty to eight representative charges (offending period 21 December 2023 to 30 April 2025), the company was sentenced on 5 June 2026 to a fine of 1,120,000 NZD. According to the Commerce Commission (ComCom, New Zealand's competition and consumer authority), the surcharge affected more than 125,000 members and generated around 1.6 million NZD in additional revenue.
Unavoidable surcharges belong in the advertised price and must not be passed off as a payment-related fee.
Transparent total prices and honestly labelled surcharges
- Authority / court
- Strafgericht, in der Quelle nicht benannt (Anklage: Commerce Commission)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- Fair Trading Act 1986, ss 11, 40(1)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- Culpability
- intentional
- Liability of senior managers
- According to the court, the labels “transaction fee” and “Payment Authority Fee” were approved at the highest level; the fee increase was decided by senior executives.
- Published
- 9 Jun 2026
Original amount 1,120,000 NZD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 5 Jun 2026.
- Commerce Commission: ComCom action sees CityFitness fined $1.12m for a misleading ‘transaction fee’ (09.06.2026) Press release of an authority
- Commerce Commission, Case register: CityFitness Group Limited (PRJ0048254) Official register or notice
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
15 Apr 2026 Automobile Association Developments Limited (AA Driving School, BSM Driving School)AA and BSM driving schools: 4.2 million GBP for drip pricing – CMA's first consumer fine €4.83m
For online bookings, the driving schools only showed a mandatory booking fee at checkout instead of in the initial price. Following an admission and settlement, the CMA imposed a penalty of 4.2 million GBP (40 % discount on 7 million GBP) and ordered refunds of more than 760,000 GBP to more than 80,000 customers. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2026, the company had around 6,776 employees.
Mandatory fees must be included from the very first price – in the United Kingdom, the CMA has been able to impose fines for this itself since 2025.
Price disclosures and mandatory fees at online checkout
- Authority / court
- Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Other
- Employees
- 1,000 to 9,999
- Mitigating circumstances
- Admission and early settlement (40 % discount).
- Published
- 15 Apr 2026
Original amount 4,200,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Apr 2026.
- CMA orders the AA and BSM driving schools to refund learner drivers over drip pricing Press release of an authority
- Companies House: Registereintrag Automobile Association Developments Limited (01878835) Official register or notice
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link
Report an error
23 Dec 2025 Chiba Lotte Marines Co., Ltd. (株式会社千葉ロッテマリーンズ)Chiba Lotte Marines: commitment plan with partial refund after signed-ball promotion Other
In a promotional letter of January 2025 for its paid fan club 'TEAM26', the baseball club Chiba Lotte Marines gave the impression that every new member would definitely receive a ball hand-signed by a player at the booth by the stadium, although only some members received one. Instead of an order, a commitment plan was approved on 23 December 2025 – a board resolution, information for consumers, measures to prevent recurrence, allegedly a partial refund of annual fees and reports on implementation; no infringement was thereby established.
Free gifts must state clearly whether every customer or only some will receive them; a commitment plan with refunds can avoid a formal order.
Advertising free gifts and special offers correctly
- Authority / court
- Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- Art. 30, Art. 31 Abs. 1 und 3 (Zusagenverfahren), Verdacht eines Verstoßes gegen Art. 5 Nr. 2 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)
- Action
- Other
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- Published
- 23 Dec 2025
- 株式会社千葉ロッテマリーンズから申請があった確約計画の認定について (Eintrag, 23.12.2025) Press release of an authority
- News Release 23.12.2025 zur Genehmigung des Zusagenplans (PDF) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
17 Dec 2025 PPB Entertainment Limited, PPB Counterparty Services Limited, Betfair Casino Limited u. a. (4 Lizenznehmer, Paddy Power Betfair)Paddy Power Betfair: £2m for identifying at-risk players too late €2.28m
Four online licensees trading as Paddy Power and Betfair (PPB Entertainment Limited, PPB Counterparty Services Limited, Betfair Casino Limited, TSE Malta LP) will pay a total of £2,000,000 in lieu of a financial penalty under a settlement and contribute to the Commission's investigation costs. An assessment in April and May 2024 found that their customer interaction systems identified signs of harm such as rapidly rising deposits or very long gambling sessions too late; one customer, for example, staked £86,000 within 16 days without a manual account review. The company had already been penalised in 2023 for marketing to vulnerable customers.
Automated triggers alone are not enough: where there are clear signs of harm, a person must intervene promptly.
Manual review where there are clear signs of harm rather than relying solely on automation
- Authority / court
- Gambling Commission
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail
- Legal basis
- s. 116 Gambling Act 2005; SRCP 3.4.3 Abs. 1, 4, 7, 8 und 11 der Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice (LCCP)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Other
- Repeat case
- yes
- Mitigating circumstances
- Full cooperation, early acceptance of the failings and swift implementation of an action plan.
- Published
- 17 Dec 2025
Original amount 2,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 Dec 2025.
- Gambling Commission: Paddy Power Betfair to pay £2m for regulatory failures (17.12.2025) Press release of an authority
- Gambling Commission: Paddy Power Betfair Public Statement (17.12.2025) Decision of an authority
- Gambling Commission: Register of regulatory actions (All regulatory actions) Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
17 Oct 2025 NOVA Language Company Co., Ltd. (株式会社NOVAランゲージカンパニー)NOVA: order over waiving an enrolment fee that was never charged Order
On the website of its 'NOVA' English schools, NOVA Language Company advertised several courses, for example in September 2024, by waiving an enrolment fee of 22,000 JPY (11,000 JPY for a children's course). The company had not charged anyone such a fee over a considerable recent period; the order required a corrective notice, measures to prevent recurrence and cessation.
A waived charge is only an advantage if it is otherwise actually charged – fictitious fees are misleading price advertising.
Advertising price advantages and fee waivers correctly
- Authority / court
- Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- Art. 7 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 2 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- Published
- 17 Oct 2025
- 株式会社NOVAランゲージカンパニーに対する景品表示法に基づく措置命令について (Eintrag, 17.10.2025) Press release of an authority
- News Release 17.10.2025 mit Maßnahmenanordnung 消表対第1556号 (PDF) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
11 Apr 2025 OGH: gyms may not impose fee increases by way of deemed consent Order
Two gym operators announced a fee increase of 6 EUR a month and treated silence or the failure to exercise a special right of termination as consent. In an action brought by the Austrian Federal Chamber of Labour (Bundesarbeitskammer), the OGH upheld the prohibition of such increases without express agreement and the publication of the judgment; it dismissed claims for repayment and information.
Price increases in ongoing consumer contracts require genuine consent – silence is not enough.
- Authority / court
- Oberster Gerichtshof (OGH), GZ 4 Ob 51/25s
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail
- Legal basis
- § 6 Abs. 1 Z 2, § 28a KSchG; §§ 1a, 14 UWG
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Other
- OGH 4 Ob 51/25s vom 11.04.2025 (RIS Justiz) Court decision
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
25 Mar 2025 Società Cooperativa Culture (CoopCulture)Colosseum tickets: CoopCulture 7 million EUR, around 20 million in total over ticket bots €7m
The Colosseum's ticketing service provider did not prevent tour operators from buying up basic tickets in bulk using bots, and itself reserved large allocations for more expensive packages; as a result, visitors could hardly find regular tickets. The AGCM imposed a fine of 7 million EUR on CoopCulture and further fines on six tour providers (including Tiqets, GetYourGuide, Musement), almost 20 million EUR in total.
Anyone selling a scarce allocation must actively prevent bot purchases and must not steer access towards expensive packages.
- Authority / court
- Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- Art. 20, comma 2 Codice del Consumo (CoopCulture); Artt. 24, 25, 23 comma 1 lett. bb-bis (Touranbieter)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- Published
- 8 Apr 2025
- PS12603 - Servizi Biglietteria Parco Archeologico del Colosseo, sanzionati CoopCulture e sei operatori turistici per quasi 20 milioni di euro Press release of an authority
- AGCM Provvedimento PS12603 (Biglietteria Colosseo), adunanza del 25 marzo 2025 Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
19 Sep 2024 a Bulgarian micro-enterpriseBulgarian micro-enterprise feigns experience with education fairs – 1,360 leva €695
The company gave universities and schools the impression of many years of experience with international education fairs and of supposedly upcoming tours, although it had not actually held any such events; in doing so, it relied on the relationships of the applicant company. The Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (Bulgarian Commission for the Protection of Competition, KZK) regarded this conduct over more than one and a half years as seriously misleading (Art. 31 ZZK – Bulgarian Protection of Competition Act) and imposed 8% of 2023 turnover (17,000 leva), i.e. 1,360 leva, plus reimbursement of costs of 6,000.26 leva.
Micro-enterprises are also liable for references and claims of experience – borrowed success stories are misleading.
- Authority / court
- Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (КЗК, Bulgarische Wettbewerbskommission)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- Art. 31 ZZK (Irreführung)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
Original amount 1,360 BGN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 19 Sep 2024.
- КЗК, Register (Suche) (Entscheidung 2024) Official register or notice
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 19 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
8 Aug 2024 a Japanese fitness companyJapanese fitness company: orders over '24-hour' claims and undisclosed influencer posts Order
The company advertised its gym chain by claiming that add-on services such as self-service teeth whitening, self-service hair removal, massage chairs and workspaces could be used around the clock at no extra cost, although they were only available for a limited number of hours a day (for example five hours for teeth whitening). In addition, the company republished Instagram posts written by third parties for payment as 'customer reviews' on its own website without disclosing that it had commissioned them; both practices were prohibited by two orders on 8 August 2024.
Paid influencer content remains advertising and must be recognisable as such – even when the company later reuses it itself.
Labelling influencer marketing and checking service promises
- Authority / court
- Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- Art. 7 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 1 und Nr. 3 (Bekanntmachung zu Stealth-Marketing) Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- Published
- 9 Aug 2024
- Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA), Veröffentlichung der Behörde (Entscheidung 2024) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 8 Aug 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
6 Nov 2023 a Brazilian pensioners' associationSenacon fines pensioners’ association over unauthorised insurance deductions €26,889
The Secretaria Nacional do Consumidor (Senacon, National Consumer Secretariat) fined an association of retirees and pensioners 141,422.58 BRL. According to the decision, the association, together with insurers and financial institutions, had amounts deducted from the pension benefits of those concerned in the form of insurance without their prior consent. The authority based the fine, among other things, on the provisions of the Consumer Protection Code on information duties and abusive commercial practices (Arts. 6, 31, 39 and 46 CDC).
Anyone collecting contributions or insurance premiums through deductions from pensions needs the documented prior consent of every person concerned.
Consent for deductions from pensions and social benefits
- Authority / court
- Secretaria Nacional do Consumidor (Senacon), Departamento de Proteção e Defesa do Consumidor (DPDC)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail
- Legal basis
- Art. 4 caput I und III, Art. 6 III und IV, Art. 31, Art. 39 III und V, Art. 46 Código de Defesa do Consumidor (Lei nº 8.078/1990); Art. 57 CDC; Art. 24–28 Decreto nº 2.181/1997
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- Published
- 7 Nov 2023
Original amount 141,422.58 BRL, converted at the ECB reference rate of 6 Nov 2023.
Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 6 Nov 2025 · Direct link
Report an error
12 Apr 2023 a US e-cigarette makerSix states and D.C.: e-cigarette maker pays 462 million USD over marketing to young people €423m
New York had sued the e-cigarette maker in 2019 over youth-oriented advertising, misleading claims about nicotine content and safety, and sales to minors; together with California, the Attorney General's office led a settlement of six states and the District of Columbia. The maker pays a total of 462 million USD in instalments (112,749,633.37 USD of it to New York) and subjects its sales and advertising to strict restrictions. Measures against individuals are not set out here. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.
Advertising that appeals to minors and health claims that play down risks lead to payments in the hundreds of millions for addictive products.
Protection of minors in product advertising and sales
- Authority / court
- Office of the New York State Attorney General (gemeinsam mit dem Attorney General of California; Einigung von sechs Bundesstaaten und D.C.)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- New York General Business Law §§ 349, 350; Executive Law § 63(12); Public Nuisance (Common Law)
- Action
- Other
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- Liability of senior managers
- Measures against individuals are not set out here.
- Published
- 12 Apr 2023
Original amount 462,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 12 Apr 2023.
Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 12 Apr 2025 · Direct link