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 countryWhat for?
by area of lawAll areas of law
- Competition law €142.8m 100 % · 13 cases
- Capital markets and financial supervision €300,000 0 % · 1 case
- Health and safety and employment law €215,000 0 % · 1 case
- Data protection €65,000 0 % · 3 cases
- Money laundering and terrorist financing €800 0 % · 1 case
- Consumer protection and online retail – 0 % · 1 case
Who?
by company- Anonymised companies €68.7m 48 % · 7 cases
- AS Asphaltstraßensanierung GmbH, BITUNOVA GmbH, Kutter Spezialstraßenbau GmbH & Co. KG, Possehl Construction GmbH (inkl. VSI), Liesen…alles für den Bau GmbH, OAT GmbH/Otto Alte-Teigeler GmbH €60.3m 42 % · 1 case
- AS Asphaltstraßensanierung, BITUNOVA, Mainka u. a. (Straßenerhaltungskartell, 7 Unternehmen) €10.5m 7 % · 1 case
- Strabag AG (Köln); Kemna Bau Andreae GmbH & Co. KG als Kronzeuge ohne Bußgeld €2.79m 2 % · 1 case
- MAGEBA Gesellschaft m.b.H.; Maurer SE, Maurer Söhne Ges. mbH (nur Feststellung) €400,000 0 % · 1 case
- Bauunternehmung Pusiol GmbH €130,000 0 % · 1 case
- Deutsche Wohnen SE – 0 % · 1 case
- PAUPE HOLDING SA, Bitusag S.A., Bitusag Neuchâtel SA, Wyss Fils SA, Prodo SA, Duckert SA – 0 % · 1 case
When?
per year, by date of decision| Period | Cases | Total |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 4 | €26.4m |
| 2023 | 4 | €37m |
| 2024 | 3 | €8.22m |
| 2025 | 6 | €11.3m |
| 2026 | 3 | €60.5m |
20 cases
6 Aug 2026 AS Asphaltstraßensanierung GmbH, BITUNOVA GmbH, Kutter Spezialstraßenbau GmbH & Co. KG, Possehl Construction GmbH (inkl. VSI), Liesen…alles für den Bau GmbH, OAT GmbH/Otto Alte-Teigeler GmbHBundeskartellamt: 60.3 million EUR against DSK road repair cartel €60.3m
From around 2010 to September 2019, six suppliers of thin cold-laid asphalt surface layers (Dünne Asphaltdeckschichten in Kaltbauweise, DSK) allocated customers – primarily public contracting authorities – and contracts among themselves nationwide and coordinated prices. Germany's Federal Cartel Office (Bundeskartellamt) imposed fines of around 60.3 million EUR; all proceedings ended in settlements.
Anyone who "shares out" public contracts regionally risks fines running into millions – calculations and bids must always be prepared independently.
Customer allocation and bid rigging in public contracts
- Authority / court
- Bundeskartellamt
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- § 1 GWB, Art. 101 AEUV
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Mitigating circumstances
- Leniency bonus for Possehl/VSI, Bitunova, Kutter and AS; settlement
- Published
- 6 Aug 2026
- Bußgelder wegen Kartellabsprachen im Bereich Straßenreparatur mit DSK Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
9 Jun 2026 Deutsche Wohnen SELG Berlin I confirms GDPR infringement by Deutsche Wohnen through tenant archive without deletion function Fine
In 2019, the Berlin Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information (BlnBDI) had imposed 14.5 million EUR on the housing group because tenant data such as salary statements, bank statements and social security data were held in an archive system with no means of deletion. Following the 2023 CJEU judgment on direct corporate liability, the Berlin Regional Court (Landgericht Berlin I) confirmed on 9 June 2026 infringements of data minimisation and storage limitation; the press release does not state the amount of the fine set by the court.
Ensure that archive and filing systems can technically implement deletion periods from the outset – ‘privacy by design’ is subject to fines.
- Authority / court
- Landgericht Berlin I (Bußgeldbehörde: Berliner Beauftragte für Datenschutz und Informationsfreiheit)
- Area of law
- Data protection · Data breaches and data security
- Legal basis
- Art. 5, Art. 25 Abs. 1 DSGVO
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Liability of senior managers
- According to the CJEU (C-807/21), a breach of duty by a person in a management position need not be proven for the corporate fine.
- Published
- 10 Jun 2026
- Landgericht Berlin bestätigt Verstoß der Deutsche Wohnen SE gegen die DSGVO Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
9 Jan 2026 Bulgarian construction subcontractor: 215,000 EUR for paying below the minimum wage €215,000
A Bulgarian construction company that worked as a subcontractor for a German firm on a major construction site in the district of Tuttlingen between January and May 2023 paid below the minimum wage, recorded only the duration of working time rather than its start and end, and did not register the posting. Around 215,000 EUR was imposed on the company, corresponding to the economic benefit obtained by paying below the minimum wage; the decision issued in September 2025 has been final since the end of 2025 (date = publication; exact date of the decision not specified).
General contractors should actively check the minimum wage, working time records and posting notifications of their foreign subcontractors; the economic benefit is disgorged in full.
- Authority / court
- Hauptzollamt Singen (Finanzkontrolle Schwarzarbeit)
- Area of law
- Health and safety and employment law · Minimum wage and undeclared work
- Legal basis
- Mindestlohngesetz; Arbeitnehmer-Entsendegesetz (Aufzeichnungs- und Meldepflichten)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Published
- 9 Jan 2026
- Zeit, Geld, Meldepflicht – Zoll ahndet Verstöße mit sechsstelligem Bußgeld (Hauptzollamt Singen) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link
Report an error
30 Sep 2025 Bauunternehmung Pusiol GmbHConstruction cartel: €130,000 on civil engineering firm Pusiol, losses considered €130,000
The Kartellgericht (Cartel Court) fined Bauunternehmung Pusiol GmbH, a subsidiary of Steiner Baugesellschaft m.b.H., allegedly 130,000 EUR for taking part in the construction cartel in Lower Austria from July 2002 to August 2016 (price fixing, market sharing and information exchange in civil engineering tenders). The BWB (Federal Competition Authority) set the fine lower because of the company's limited financial capacity, as it reported annual losses in 2023 and 2024; the company gave a full acknowledgement.
Collusion from long ago is still punished; a strained financial position can reduce the fine but cannot avert it.
Bid rigging in tenders
- Authority / court
- Oberlandesgericht Wien als Kartellgericht (Antrag der Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- § 1 Abs. 1 KartG und Art. 101 Abs. 1 AEUV; § 29 Abs. 1 Z 1 lit. a und d KartG
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Repeat case
- no
- Mitigating circumstances
- Limited financial capacity (losses in 2023 and 2024); full acknowledgement.
- Published
- 4 Mar 2026
Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
25 Aug 2025 PAUPE HOLDING SA, Bitusag S.A., Bitusag Neuchâtel SA, Wyss Fils SA, Prodo SA, Duckert SAWEKO fines road maintenance firms in Jura/Neuchâtel over bid rigging Fine
Regional suppliers of surface treatments and chip sealing in road maintenance colluded on bids and allocated territories. Switzerland's Competition Commission (Wettbewerbskommission, WEKO) imposed sanctions on Bitusag/Paupe (jointly and severally, CHF 640,000–990,000, exact amount redacted), Wyss Fils (CHF 44,000–74,000), Prodo (CHF 760) and Duckert (CHF 0) and approved amicable settlements; the investigation against Colas Suisse was discontinued.
Small regional road builders are also sanctioned – cover bids and territorial protection must disappear from corporate culture.
Cover bids and territorial agreements in regional road construction
- Authority / court
- Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- Art. 5 Abs. 3 i.V.m. Abs. 1 KG, Art. 49a Abs. 1 KG
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Mitigating circumstances
- Amicable settlements; leniency programme (Duckert free of sanctions)
- Enduits superficiels et gravillonnage : Décision du 25 août 2025 Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
9 Jul 2025 Share buyback disclosed too late: BVwG reduces FMA penalty against real estate company €300,000
On Saturday, 17 December 2022, the management board of a listed real estate company (anonymised in the judgment) approved by email a new share buyback programme including its volume, period and price, but only published it after a formal resolution on Monday, 19 December 2022. Austria's Financial Market Authority (FMA) imposed a penalty of 375,000 EUR; the Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht, BVwG) upheld the breach of the ad hoc disclosure obligation but reduced the penalty to 300,000 EUR.
A final decision by a corporate body triggers the ad hoc disclosure obligation immediately – weekends and outstanding contractual details do not postpone it.
Ad hoc disclosure obligation for decisions of corporate bodies, including at weekends
- Authority / court
- Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Beschwerde gegen Straferkenntnis der Finanzmarktaufsicht FMA)
- Area of law
- Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations
- Legal basis
- Art. 17 Abs. 1 MAR i. V. m. § 156 Abs. 3 Z 2, Abs. 4 BörseG 2018
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- reduced
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Culpability
- negligent
- BVwG W279 2310813-1 vom 09.07.2025 Court decision
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
5 Jun 2025 MAGEBA Gesellschaft m.b.H.; Maurer SE, Maurer Söhne Ges. mbH (nur Feststellung)Bridge component suppliers: €400,000 fine on MAGEBA, leniency applicant Maurer not fined €400,000
The Kartellgericht (Cartel Court) fined MAGEBA Gesellschaft m.b.H. 400,000 EUR because, from November 2017 to December 2018, it shared customers for road expansion joints and bridge bearings in Austria with a competitor and exchanged information on pricing behaviour. Against Maurer SE and Maurer Söhne Ges. mbH the court merely declared the infringement because of their leniency status. A compliance system introduced in the course of cooperation was taken into account in mitigation, and intent in a hardcore restriction as an aggravating factor.
The first to report a cartel can escape a fine entirely, while those who wait pay; this argues for internal reporting channels and quick decisions on a leniency application.
Customer allocation and the leniency programme
- Authority / court
- Oberlandesgericht Wien als Kartellgericht (Antrag der Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- § 1 Abs. 1 KartG; § 29 Abs. 1 Z 1 lit. a KartG; § 28 Abs. 1 und 1a Z 1 KartG (Feststellung gegenüber Kronzeugin)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Culpability
- intentional
- Repeat case
- no
- Mitigating circumstances
- Only five projects over about 13 months, no enrichment established, low-level information exchange, the group's economic difficulties, compliance system introduced in the course of cooperation.
- Published
- 18 Nov 2025
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
13 May 2025 AS Asphaltstraßensanierung, BITUNOVA, Mainka u. a. (Straßenerhaltungskartell, 7 Unternehmen)Bundeskartellamt: 10.5 million EUR against seven road repair companies €10.5m
From 2016 to 2019, seven road repair companies allocated contracting authorities regionally, determined in advance who should win the contract and set each other minimum prices for cover bids. The Bundeskartellamt imposed fines of 10.5 million EUR; BITUNOVA cooperated as leniency applicant, and all proceedings ended in settlements. Addressees: AS Asphaltstraßensanierung GmbH, bausion Strassenbau-Produkte GmbH, BITUNOVA GmbH, Gerhard Herbers GmbH, Liesen … alles für den Bau GmbH, Mainka GmbH Straßenunterhaltung, MOT Müritzer Oberflächentechnik GmbH.
Cover bids are not only subject to fines but, for the employees involved, a criminal offence of bid rigging.
Cover bids and territorial agreements in tenders
- Authority / court
- Bundeskartellamt
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- § 1 GWB
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Mitigating circumstances
- Leniency programme (BITUNOVA), settlement
- Liability of senior managers
- Measures against individuals are not reported here.
- Published
- 13 May 2025
- Kartellabsprachen zwischen Straßenreparatur-Unternehmen Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link
Report an error
15 Jan 2025 Saxony: fine against estate agent for breach of AML due diligence obligations €800
The Saxony State Directorate (Landesdirektion Sachsen), as anti-money laundering supervisor for the non-financial sector, imposed a fine of 800 EUR on an estate agent, announced in anonymised form, for breach of the due diligence obligations under the German Money Laundering Act (GwG). The list of announcements shows numerous further fines and reprimands against agents ranging from 50 to 5,000 EUR.
Estate agents must identify both contracting parties in good time – even small offices are subject to active anti-money laundering supervision.
Identification of contracting parties in property brokerage
- Authority / court
- Landesdirektion Sachsen (Geldwäscheaufsicht Nichtfinanzsektor)
- Area of law
- Money laundering and terrorist financing · Customer due diligence
- Legal basis
- Geldwäschegesetz (Sorgfaltspflichten); Bekanntmachung nach § 57 GwG
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Bekanntmachungen gemäß § 57 GwG – Landesdirektion Sachsen (lfd. Nr. 29) Official register or notice
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
6 Nov 2024 Strabag AG (Köln); Kemna Bau Andreae GmbH & Co. KG als Kronzeuge ohne BußgeldBundeskartellamt: 2.79 million EUR against Strabag over collusion on Cologne's Zoobrücke €2.79m
In the tender for the refurbishment of the Zoobrücke bridge in Cologne in early 2017, employees agreed that one company would submit a cover bid so that the other would win the contract, in return for a later compensation payment. According to the Bundeskartellamt's findings, Strabag received a fine of 2.79 million EUR in a settlement procedure; the proceedings against Kemna were discontinued as it was the leniency applicant.
A single rigged tender is enough for a fine and criminal proceedings – compensation payments between bidders are a clear red flag.
Cover bids and compensation payments in individual tenders
- Authority / court
- Bundeskartellamt
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- § 1 GWB
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Employees
- 10,000 or more
- Mitigating circumstances
- Settlement
- Liability of senior managers
- Bid rigging is also a criminal offence for the individuals involved under Section 298 StGB (German Criminal Code); their prosecution is a matter for the public prosecutor.
- Published
- 6 Nov 2024
- Geldbuße gegen die Strabag AG wegen Absprachen bei der Sanierung der Zoobrücke in Köln Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link
Report an error
16 Oct 2024 OGH: 65,000 EUR fine against joinery over cover bids and market sharing €65,000
From February 2011 to October 2016, a construction and furniture joinery anonymised in the decision (together with its general partner GmbH) participated in agreements on successful bidders, cover bids, market sharing and information exchange in tenders in Lower Austria and Vienna. The Cartel Court imposed a fine of 55,000 EUR only for 26 infringements up to June 2016; the OGH upheld the appeals of the BWB and the Federal Cartel Prosecutor and set a fine of 65,000 EUR on a joint and several basis for the entire period.
Even small craft businesses are penalised for cover bids – "courtesy bids" among colleagues are competition law infringements.
Cover bids in tenders for craft trades
- Authority / court
- Oberster Gerichtshof als Kartellobergericht (Antrag der Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- § 1 Abs 1 KartG 2005, §§ 28, 29 KartG
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- OGH 16 Ok 6/23b vom 16.10.2024 Court decision
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link
Report an error
21 May 2024 fourteen Swiss gravel and construction companiesWEKO fines a gravel pit and its shareholders CHF 5.3 million €5.37m
A gravel extraction joint venture, the largest gravel and landfill pit in its region, and its shareholders coordinated through the joint venture's board, granted the shareholders cheaper gravel prices and transport subsidies, undertook not to extract gravel themselves in the joint venture's area and for a time tied the dumping of excavated material to gravel purchases. The Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO, Swiss Competition Commission) imposed sanctions totalling CHF 5,303,750: CHF 3,131,100 on the joint venture, CHF 383,150 on a first shareholder group of three companies, CHF 304,150 on a second group of three companies, CHF 460,750 on a third group of two companies, CHF 242,500 on a gravel works, CHF 387,100 on a fourth group of two companies and CHF 395,000 on a fifth group of two companies, together with conduct requirements concerning the joint venture's board and management. With the exception of individual points, the ruling is under appeal before the Federal Administrative Court (as of December 2025).
Where competitors sit together on the board of a joint venture, clear information barriers are needed, or the board becomes a cartel platform.
Joint ventures between competitors: information exchange and collusion on the board
- Authority / court
- Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- Art. 49a Abs. 1 i.V.m. Art. 5 Abs. 1, 3 und 4 KG; bei KAGA zusätzlich Art. 7 Abs. 1 i.V.m. Abs. 2 KG
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- under appeal
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Mitigating circumstances
- Several parties concluded amicable settlements with the WEKO secretariat, which WEKO approved.
- Published
- 27 Aug 2024
Original amount 5,303,750 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 21 May 2024.
- WEKO, Entscheide (Übersicht) (Entscheidung 2024) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 21 May 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
7 Dec 2023 an Austrian non-profit housing companyNon-profit housing company: €10,000 for ignoring data protection authority requests €10,000
The DSB (Datenschutzbehörde, Austrian data protection authority) fined a non-profit housing company limited by shares 10,000 EUR because it left several requests for comments in a complaint procedure between November 2021 and June 2022 unanswered, thereby breaching its duty to cooperate with the supervisory authority. The cause was internal failings in forwarding official letters; the DSB found conditional intent. Mitigating factors were the confession, the absence of previous infringements and a new control system for official mail together with staff training.
Mail from supervisory authorities needs a reliable internal intake and forwarding process with deadline control, otherwise silence alone leads to a fine.
Handling letters from the data protection authority
Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.
- Authority / court
- Datenschutzbehörde (DSB)
- Area of law
- Data protection
- Legal basis
- Art. 31 iVm Art. 58 Abs. 1 lit. a und e DSGVO; Art. 83 Abs. 4 lit. a DSGVO
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Culpability
- intentional
- Repeat case
- no
- Mitigating circumstances
- No previous infringements; cooperation, insight and confession; new control system for official documents and internal data protection training.
- RIS, Entscheidungen der Datenschutzbehörde (Suche) (Entscheidung 2023) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 7 Dec 2025 · Direct link
Report an error
15 Nov 2023 an Austrian construction holding company and two construction companiesConstruction cartel: €9.8m on a construction holding and two construction companies €9.8m
The Kartellgericht (Cartel Court) imposed a fine of 9.8 million EUR, jointly and severally, on an Austrian construction holding company and two construction companies for taking part in the construction cartel from July 2002 to October 2017. Because of their significant role in Lower Austria and Styria they were treated as main participants; collusion also concerned individual projects in other federal provinces. The acknowledgement given in the consensual termination of the proceedings and a certified compliance management system were taken into account in mitigation.
A company that plays a leading regional role in a cartel is classed as a main participant; an effective compliance system lowers the fine but does not replace timely detection.
Bid rigging in tenders
- Authority / court
- Oberlandesgericht Wien als Kartellgericht (Antrag der Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- § 1 Abs. 1 KartG und Art. 101 Abs. 1 AEUV; § 29 Abs. 1 Z 1 lit. a und d KartG
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Culpability
- intentional
- Repeat case
- no
- Mitigating circumstances
- Consensual termination of the proceedings with a full acknowledgement; certified compliance management system.
- Published
- 5 Mar 2024
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 15 Nov 2025 · Direct link
Report an error
3 Jul 2023 a Swiss landfill operatorWEKO sanctions landfill operator for abuse of a dominant position Fine
According to WEKO's findings, the operator of a landfill in the canton of Basel-Landschaft abused its dominant position (Art. 7 para. 2 lit. b KG (Swiss Cartel Act), discrimination against trading partners). The sanction is between CHF 762,048 and 1,143,072 (exact amount redacted in the published version); in addition, there are procedural costs of CHF 196,530.
Regional infrastructure such as landfills can also be dominant – prices and acceptance conditions must be non-discriminatory.
- Authority / court
- Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Abuse of market power
- Legal basis
- Art. 7 Abs. 1 und Abs. 2 lit. b KG, Art. 49a Abs. 1 KG
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- WEKO, Entscheide (Übersicht) (Entscheidung 2023) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 3 Jul 2025 · Direct link
Report an error
27 Mar 2023 three Austrian construction companiesConstruction cartel: €27.15m fine on three Austrian construction companies €27.2m
The Kartellgericht (Cartel Court) imposed a fine of 27.15 million EUR, jointly and severally, on three Austrian construction companies for taking part in the Austrian construction cartel. From at least July 2002 to October 2017, prices were fixed, markets shared and information exchanged in public and private tenders for building and civil engineering across large parts of Austria, partly through unlawful consortia and bidding groups. Reductions were granted for cooperation as leniency applicant, the acknowledgement, a certified compliance system and a reorganisation.
Bidders must stop any contact with competitors about live tenders; practices handed down by predecessors are a typical cartel risk in sales.
Bid rigging in public and private tenders
- Authority / court
- Oberlandesgericht Wien als Kartellgericht (Antrag der Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- § 1 Abs. 1 KartG und Art. 101 Abs. 1 AEUV; § 29 Z 1 lit. a und d KartG
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Repeat case
- no
- Mitigating circumstances
- Cooperation as leniency applicant (§ 11b WettbG, Austrian Competition Act), consensual termination with acknowledgement, certified compliance system, reorganisation.
- Published
- 21 Mar 2024
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 27 Mar 2025 · Direct link
Report an error
7 Dec 2022 four German road construction companiesBundeskartellamt: fines on four road builders for bid rigging Fine
The Bundeskartellamt (Federal Cartel Office) fined four construction companies from the same city a total of almost 1 million EUR. Between January 2012 and February 2018 (one of the companies until summer 2017) they had agreed at recurring meetings, for several hundred road-works tenders issued by the city (contract volume around 18 million EUR), which of them would submit the lowest bid while the others bid higher. The fining decisions were issued between September and December 2022 by way of settlement and are final; a further road construction company, as leniency applicant, was granted immunity from fines.
Agreeing with competitors on who wins public tenders can lead to fines years later, once one participant cooperates with the authority as a leniency applicant.
Bid rigging in public tenders
- Authority / court
- Bundeskartellamt
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Mitigating circumstances
- All four companies cooperated in the investigation and agreed to a settlement.
- Published
- 15 Feb 2023
- Bundeskartellamt, Presse (Übersicht) (Entscheidung 2022) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 7 Dec 2024 · Direct link
Report an error
23 Nov 2022 four Austrian construction firmsConstruction cartel: €26.33m fine on four Austrian construction firms €26.3m
The Kartellgericht (Cartel Court) fined four Austrian construction firms 26.33 million EUR. From July 2002 to October 2017 they took part in price fixing, market sharing and information exchange in building and civil engineering tenders in seven federal provinces, partly through unlawful consortia and bidding groups. The fine was based on a settlement; the Cartel Court rejected a later application by the companies to correct the decision, and the Oberster Gerichtshof (OGH, Supreme Court) upheld that ruling.
Consortia and joint bids with competitors need a documented competition law review before they are formed.
Bid rigging and bidding consortia
- Authority / court
- Oberlandesgericht Wien als Kartellgericht (Antrag der Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- § 1 Abs. 1 KartG und Art. 101 Abs. 1 AEUV; § 29 Z 1 lit. a und d KartG
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Culpability
- intentional
- Repeat case
- no
- Mitigating circumstances
- Consensual termination of the proceedings (with a smaller reduction because the proceedings were already pending), group-wide compliance management system, organisational separation of asphalt mixing plants, additional internal checks before forming consortia.
- Published
- 25 Jul 2023
- RIS, Judikatur Justiz (Suche) (Entscheidung 2022) Court decision
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 23 Nov 2024 · Direct link
Report an error
21 Sep 2022 LfDI BW: fines against property developer and surveyor over land register data used for purchase offers €55,000
A surveying engineer used the electronic land register to identify hundreds of landowners and passed the data on to a property development company, which wrote to the owners with purchase offers without informing them of the data source. The Baden-Württemberg data protection authority (LfDI BW) imposed 50,000 EUR on the property developer and 5,000 EUR on the surveyor (55,000 EUR in total); both decisions became final.
Do not use professional access to registers such as the land register for customer acquisition or for passing data on to business partners.
Purpose limitation of professional register access
- Authority / court
- Landesbeauftragter für den Datenschutz und die Informationsfreiheit Baden-Württemberg (LfDI BW)
- Area of law
- Data protection · Marketing and consent
- Legal basis
- Art. 6 Abs. 1 lit. f, Art. 14 DSGVO
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Published
- 21 Sep 2022
- LfDI Baden-Württemberg, Pressemitteilungen (Übersicht) (Entscheidung 2022) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 21 Sep 2024 · Direct link
Report an error
16 Sep 2022 LG Hamburg: advertise star ratings only with the number of reviews and the period covered Order
A platform matching property sellers with estate agents advertised average star ratings without stating the number, period and distribution of the reviews. In an action brought by the Wettbewerbszentrale, the Regional Court of Hamburg (LG Hamburg) ordered it to cease and desist insofar as the total number and period were missing; the further claim for a breakdown by star category was dismissed by the Higher Regional Court of Hamburg (OLG Hamburg) and the BGH (judgment of 25 July 2024).
Anyone advertising with average ratings must at least state the number of underlying reviews and the period they cover.
Advertising with customer reviews
- Authority / court
- Landgericht Hamburg (Revision der Klägerin zum Umfang beim BGH)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Fake reviews
- Legal basis
- §§ 3, 5a Abs. 1, 8 UWG
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Published
- 25 Jul 2024
- Bundesgerichtshof, Pressemitteilungen (Übersicht) (Entscheidung 2022) Court press release
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 5 · Company name anonymised since 16 Sep 2024 · Direct link