Compliance Radar

Who was sanctioned, and for what?

Fines, court rulings and incidents from Europe and North America: 718 cases from 32 jurisdictions, each with an official source and checked against that source before publication. Filter by country, area of law and sector. Click a chart to drill down one level.

3cases from 1 jurisdiction
—Total of monetary amounts (0 cases with an amount)
—Largest single case
—Median per case with an amount

Click a bar to drill down one level.

Where?

by authority
  1. Bundesgerichtshof (I. Zivilsenat), Az. I ZR 170/24 — 0 % · 1 case
  2. Bundesgerichtshof (I. Zivilsenat), Az. I ZR 183/24 — 0 % · 1 case
  3. Bundesgerichtshof (I. Zivilsenat), Az. I ZR 200/25 — 0 % · 1 case

What for?

by topic
  1. Misleading advertising and pricing — 0 % · 2 cases
  2. Information duties in online retail — 0 % · 1 case

Who?

by sector

All sectors

  1. Healthcare — 0 % · 1 case
  2. Retail and e-commerce — 0 % · 1 case
  3. Other — 0 % · 1 case

When?

per quarter, by date of decision
Trend
PeriodCasesTotal
Q3 20230—
Q4 20230—
Q1 20240—
Q2 20240—
Q3 20240—
Q4 20240—
Q1 20250—
Q2 20250—
Q3 20251—
Q4 20251—
Q1 20260—
Q2 20260—
Q3 20261—

3 cases

16 Jul 2026 BGH: online cancellation page must not offer a "pause contract" alternative GermanyInformation duties in online retail 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.

What organisations can take from it

Keep retention or pause offers off the confirmation page of the online cancellation process.

Relevance to training and awareness

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

Anonymous: we store only your text — no contact details and no IP address.

9 Oct 2025 BGH: price reduction only permissible with a clearly legible 30-day lowest price GermanyMisleading advertising and pricing Order

A food discounter advertised a coffee with a price reduction without stating the lowest total price of the previous 30 days unambiguously, clearly recognisably and legibly. In an action brought by the Wettbewerbszentrale (Centre for Protection against Unfair Competition), the BGH upheld the injunction issued by the lower courts (Regional Court of Amberg, Higher Regional Court of Nuremberg).

What organisations can take from it

In all discount advertising, state the 30-day lowest price as clearly as the discount itself.

Relevance to training and awareness

Price information in discount advertising (30-day lowest price)

Authority / court
Bundesgerichtshof (I. Zivilsenat), Az. I ZR 183/24
Area of law
Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
Legal basis
§ 11 Abs. 1 PAngV; § 5a Abs. 1, § 5b Abs. 4 UWG
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Retail and e-commerce
Published
9 Oct 2025

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

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text — no contact details and no IP address.

31 Jul 2025 BGH: no before-and-after images for nose and chin correction with hyaluronic acid GermanyMisleading advertising and pricing Order

A practice for aesthetic treatments advertised hyaluronic acid filler injections for the nose and chin on its website and on Instagram using before-and-after images. In an action brought by a consumer advice centre (Verbraucherzentrale), the BGH upheld the injunction issued by the Higher Regional Court of Hamm (OLG Hamm): such procedures are deemed to be surgical cosmetic procedures, for which this kind of advertising is prohibited.

What organisations can take from it

Instagram posts are also advertising – the strict limits of the law on advertising for medicinal products and treatments (Heilmittelwerberecht) apply to aesthetic procedures.

Relevance to training and awareness

Social media advertising for healthcare services

Authority / court
Bundesgerichtshof (I. Zivilsenat), Az. I ZR 170/24
Area of law
Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
Legal basis
§ 11 Abs. 1 Satz 3 Nr. 1, § 1 Abs. 1 Nr. 2 Buchst. c HWG; UKlaG
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Healthcare
Published
31 Jul 2025

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

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text — no contact details and no IP address.

Ready for training that sticks?

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

Start free trial