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.

127cases from 27 jurisdictions
€604.9mTotal of monetary amounts (108 cases with an amount)
€226,380Median per case with an amount

Click a bar to drill down one level.

Where?

by region

All jurisdictions

  1. EU 42 cases 33 % · €312.4m
  2. United Kingdom 29 cases 23 % · €191.1m
  3. Canada 20 cases 16 % · €1.56m
  4. USA 12 cases 9 % · €71.3m
  5. Australia 5 cases 4 % · €730,384
  6. Hong Kong 5 cases 4 % · €223,452
  7. Singapore 4 cases 3 % · €10.3m
  8. Brazil 3 cases 2 % · €11.7m
  9. Switzerland 3 cases 2 % · €5.37m
  10. New Zealand 2 cases 2 % · €292,765
  11. 2 more2 cases

What for?

by area of law

All areas of law

  1. Competition law 34 cases 27 % · €437.6m
  2. Health and safety and employment law 22 cases 17 % · €7.27m
  3. Data protection 18 cases 14 % · €1.71m
  4. Money laundering and terrorist financing 18 cases 14 % · €894,152
  5. Sanctions and export control 7 cases 6 % · €27.2m
  6. Consumer protection and online retail 7 cases 6 % · €47.1m
  7. Bribery and corruption 6 cases 5 % · €69.5m
  8. Supply chain and human rights 5 cases 4 % ·
  9. Capital markets and financial supervision 4 cases 3 % · €8.3m
  10. Information security and cyber 3 cases 2 % · €5.06m
  11. 1 more3 cases

Who?

by company
  1. Anonymised companies 46 cases 39 % · €304.6m
  2. „О-Рент“ ЕООД (sowie „Инжконсулт“ ЕООД und „Земекоп“ ЕООД) 1 case 1 % · €2,403
  3. 1135233 B.C. Ltd. 1 case 1 % · €92,557
  4. 595 Construction LLC 1 case 1 % · €268,784
  5. 9321-0599 Québec Inc. 1 case 1 % · €14,401
  6. Allied Stone Inc. 1 case 1 % · €10.6m
  7. Alquiler Seguro, S.A.U. 1 case 1 % · €3.6m
  8. 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 1 case 1 % · €60.3m
  9. AS Asphaltstraßensanierung, BITUNOVA, Mainka u. a. (Straßenerhaltungskartell, 7 Unternehmen) 1 case 1 % · €10.5m
  10. ATE, s. r. o.; AŽD Praha s.r.o.; EPLcond a.s.; MONZAS, a.s.; První SaZ Plzeň a.s.; STARMON s.r.o. 1 case 1 % · €6.39m
  11. 64 more64 cases

When?

per year, by date of decision
Trend
PeriodCasesTotal
202210€42.5m
202322€133.5m
202426€139.3m
202531€169.3m
202638€120.3m

127 cases

24 Sep 2026 M&J GroupCMA: fine against construction firm for concealing evidence during an inspection United KingdomCartels and collusion €29,075

During an inspection as part of an investigation into bid rigging, a work mobile phone and documents were removed from the premises on the instructions of a manager, and possession of a work mobile phone was denied. The UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) imposed a fine of 25,000 GBP on M&J.

What organisations can take from it

Dawn raid training is mandatory: removing mobile phones or documents during an inspection obstructs the investigation, even when acting on instructions.

Relevance to training and awareness

Correct conduct during inspections (dawn raids), no removal of evidence

Authority / court
Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Section 40A(1) Competition Act 1998
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Culpability
intentional
Liability of senior managers
Measures against individuals are not reported here.
Published
24 Sep 2026

Original amount 25,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 24 Sep 2026.

Sources

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

Report an error

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

22 Sep 2026 Carioca Christiani-Nielsen Engenharia S.A.Carioca Engenharia pays 6.13 million BRL in CADE settlement on construction tenders BrazilCartels and collusion €1.04m

Carioca Christiani-Nielsen Engenharia S.A. concluded a single settlement (Termo de Compromisso de Cessação) with the Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica (CADE, Brazilian competition authority) covering four proceedings concerning alleged collusion in public tenders for infrastructure projects (metro, airports operated by Infraero, the rail company CPTM and the transport authority DNIT). The company admitted its participation, allegedly pays 6,134,676.92 BRL in instalments to the Fund for Diffuse Rights (FDD) and waives court and administrative disputes on these matters. Together with the company’s earlier settlements with CADE, its contributions exceed 90 million BRL.

What organisations can take from it

A settlement covering all pending cartel cases creates legal certainty but requires an admission, payment and full cooperation.

Relevance to training and awareness

Bid rigging in public construction contracts

Authority / court
Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica (CADE)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Lei nº 12.529/2011 (Lei de Defesa da Concorrência), Termo de Compromisso de Cessação
Action
Other
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Construction and real estate
Published
22 Sep 2026

Original amount 6,134,676.92 BRL, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Sep 2026.

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

Report an error

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

16 Sep 2026 Hillbeck Homes (Sowerby Bridge) LtdDeveloper pays £300,000 after agency worker falls through unprotected stairwell opening United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €349,895

A 24-year-old labourer working as a temporary worker for a scaffolding company fell, in his second week of work on the developer's housing site, through a stairwell opening that was neither securely covered nor guarded, dropping one storey onto concrete and suffering serious spinal injuries. The court found the company guilty on three counts because it had neither adequately planned nor supervised work at height and had not taken suitable measures to prevent falls. Fine of £300,000 plus costs. The company is a micro-enterprise with fewer than 10 employees.

What organisations can take from it

Floor openings on construction sites must be covered with load-bearing covers or guarded at all times – new and temporary workers in particular do not know where the hazards are.

Relevance to training and awareness

Fall protection at openings; induction of new workers

Authority / court
Leeds Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Health and Safety Executive)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Work at Height Regulations 2005
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Employees
Under 50
Published
21 Sep 2026

Original amount 300,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Sep 2026.

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

Report an error

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

4 Sep 2026 In Construction LimitedHong Kong: HKD 640,000 fine for In Construction after fatal crane accident Hong KongWorkplace safety and accidents €70,237

In Construction was fined HKD 640,000 for breaches of the Factories and Industrial Undertakings Ordinance and the regulations on lifting appliances and safety management. On a foundation construction site in Tai Po on 30 September 2025, a female worker had been trapped between the rear end of a slewing crawler crane and the railing of a steel platform and later died.

What organisations can take from it

A crane's slewing zone must be cordoned off, especially on confined platforms where railings create a crushing point.

Relevance to training and awareness

Securing the danger zone of slewing cranes

Authority / court
Shatin Magistrates' Courts, Hongkong (Anklage: Labour Department)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Factories and Industrial Undertakings Ordinance; Factories and Industrial Undertakings (Lifting Appliances and Lifting Gear) Regulations; Factories and Industrial Undertakings (Safety Management) Regulation
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Published
4 Sep 2026

Original amount 640,000 HKD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 4 Sep 2026.

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

Report an error

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

3 Sep 2026 BDW Trading (Barratt Redrow)Barratt Redrow subsidiary BDW pays 201,500 GBP to environmental projects after silt entered brooks United KingdomEmissions and permits €234,153

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.

What organisations can take from it

Developers are liable for environmental damage caused by their subcontractors; clear procedures and training on handling surface water prevent costly proceedings.

Relevance to training and awareness

Protecting watercourses on construction sites and managing subcontractors

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

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

Report an error

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

20 Aug 2026 Grace Motors Limited (Grace Construction)Grace Construction: 38,500 NZD for working at height despite a prohibition notice New ZealandWorkplace safety and accidents €19,586

At a site for two-storey residential units in Kelston (Auckland), workers were working on the upper floor without adequate fall protection, and the site also had temporary platforms, partially removed scaffolding and unsecured ladders; WorkSafe (New Zealand's workplace health and safety regulator) therefore prohibited work at height on the second floor by a prohibition notice on 30 August 2024. Because work continued there on 2 and 4 September 2024 nonetheless, the Waitakere District Court imposed a fine of 38,500 NZD on 20 August 2026, plus costs of 1,099.10 NZD.

What organisations can take from it

A prohibition notice means an immediate stop to the work – site management must actively enforce it until the risk has demonstrably been remedied.

Relevance to training and awareness

Fall protection and compliance with regulatory stop-work orders

Authority / court
Waitakere District Court (Anklage: WorkSafe New Zealand)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, s 107(1), (2)(b)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Liability of senior managers
The prohibition notice had been issued to one of the directors.
Published
4 Sep 2026

Original amount 38,500 NZD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 20 Aug 2026.

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

Report an error

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

19 Aug 2026 Sioux Erosion Control Inc.DOJ: jury convicts erosion control firm of price fixing in Oklahoma road construction USACartels and collusion –

A jury found Sioux Erosion Control guilty of having fixed prices for erosion control services, allocated contracts regionally and rigged bids on publicly funded road construction projects in Oklahoma (more than 100 million USD) from 2017 to 2023. Sentencing was still pending; the decision is not final.

What organisations can take from it

Subcontractors in public road construction are also targeted by prosecutors.

Relevance to training and awareness

Price-fixing and territorial agreements for subcontracted services in road construction

Authority / court
U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Section 1 Sherman Act
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Liability of senior managers
Measures against individuals are not reported here.
Published
20 Aug 2026

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Direct link

Report an error

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

13 Aug 2026 „О-Рент“ ЕООД (sowie „Инжконсулт“ ЕООД und „Земекоп“ ЕООД)Construction machinery cartel: fine for O-Rent, compliance programme for all participants BulgariaCartels and collusion €2,403

The Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (Bulgarian Commission for the Protection of Competition, KZK) found a cartel in public tenders for mining and construction machinery (price fixing and market sharing, Art. 15 ZZK – Bulgarian Protection of Competition Act, Art. 101 TFEU). Inzhkonsult and Zemekop, as a single undertaking, were exempted from the fine; O-Rent received a sanction of 2,403.07 EUR. All three companies must introduce a competition law compliance programme within 60 days and report on it.

What organisations can take from it

The authority now expressly requires compliance programmes – anyone bidding in tenders should have one before it is ordered.

Relevance to training and awareness

Competition law in tenders; compliance programme

Authority / court
Комисия за защита на конкуренцията (КЗК, Bulgarische Wettbewerbskommission)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 15 Abs. 1 Nr. 1 und 2 ZZK; Art. 101 Abs. 1 lit. a und c AEUV
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Mitigating circumstances
Immunity from fines for two participants (leniency programme)
Published
20 Aug 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.

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 GermanyCartels and collusion €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.

What organisations can take from it

Anyone who "shares out" public contracts regionally risks fines running into millions – calculations and bids must always be prepared independently.

Relevance to training and awareness

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

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 2026 Whitemountain Quarries Limited€1.2m fine for Whitemountain Quarries after fatal roadworks incident IrelandWorkplace safety and accidents €1.2m

At roadworks on the R238 in Donegal in August 2020, one wheel of a car dropped onto the unfinished hard shoulder; when the driver steered back, the car slid on the freshly laid surface and went into Lough Foyle; three occupants drowned and one was injured, and appropriate temporary traffic management was lacking. The company pleaded guilty to breaching its duties towards non-employees under s. 12 of the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 and was fined €1,200,000.

What organisations can take from it

Employers at roadworks in public spaces are also liable for the safety of third parties; signage and guidance measures must remain adequate until the works are finished.

Authority / court
Letterkenny Circuit Criminal Court (Anklage: Health and Safety Authority)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
s. 12 i. V. m. s. 77(9)(a) Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Published
31 Jul 2026

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

Report an error

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

23 Jul 2026 Orchids Builders LLCFlorida roofer: OSHA proposes $349,754 over allegedly repeated lack of fall protection USAWorkplace safety and accidents €307,017

According to the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), inspectors found on 21 January and 10 March 2026 at two residential construction sites in Rockledge that employees of the roofing contractor were working on roofs without fall protection; training records, eye protection when using nail guns and ladders extending sufficiently above the roof edge were also missing. The company had been inspected seven times since 2023, each time with citations for fall protection. OSHA proposed penalties of $349,754 (2 violations classified as wilful, 4 as repeat); the violations are alleged and may be contested.

What organisations can take from it

Companies that allow the same fall hazards to recur after earlier inspections risk classification as a repeat or wilful violation with substantially higher penalties.

Relevance to training and awareness

Fall protection during roofing work

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
U.S. Department of Labor – Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
29 CFR 1926 Subpart M (Fall Protection), Subpart X (Ladders)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Culpability
intentional
Repeat case
yes
Published
23 Jul 2026

Original amount 349,754 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 Jul 2026.

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

Report an error

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

21 Jul 2026 Dragon Alfa Cement LimitedCement plant with 12 employees: 1 million GBP after fatal accident at unguarded machinery United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €1.17m

In 2021 a 35-year-old employee was crushed by a 1.6-tonne concrete weight at the cement bagging plant in Sharpness. A large section of the perimeter fencing had routinely been removed over a prolonged period, leaving dangerous moving parts freely accessible. The company – with 12 employees according to its 2024 annual accounts – was fined 1 million GBP plus 9,621 GBP in costs.

What organisations can take from it

Treat removed guard fencing as a management failure and stop it – tolerating permanently open danger zones can lead to fines in the millions, even for a small business.

Authority / court
Bristol Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Health and Safety Executive)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Section 2(1) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Employees
Under 50
Published
21 Jul 2026

Original amount 1,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 21 Jul 2026.

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

Report an error

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

16 Jun 2026 SCS Railways (Joint Venture von Skanska Construction UK Limited, Costain Limited und Strabag AG)HS2 joint venture SCS Railways: £400,000 fine after tipper truck fall United KingdomWorkplace safety and accidents €462,583

SCS Railways, a joint venture of Skanska, Costain and Strabag on the HS2 rail project, was fined £400,000 and ordered to pay £8,974 in costs. On 27 July 2021 at the Copthall North site near Uxbridge, a 20-tonne tipper truck belonging to a contracted haulage company fell from an excavation ramp and the driver was injured. The Health and Safety Executive found neither signage nor edge protection on the vehicle routes; a traffic route changed on the morning of the incident had left an unprotected edge and had been neither properly planned nor communicated in time.

What organisations can take from it

Every short-notice change to site vehicle routes needs a risk check and immediate briefing of all drivers.

Relevance to training and awareness

Traffic routes and change management on major construction sites

Authority / court
Uxbridge Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Health and Safety Executive)
Area of law
Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
Legal basis
Section 3(1) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Mitigating circumstances
Guilty plea.
Published
26 Jun 2026

Original amount 400,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Jun 2026.

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

Report an error

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

9 Jun 2026 Leader Properties Investment Pty LtdNSW: property manager Leader Properties penalised for unlawfully locking out a tenant AustraliaConsumer protection and online retail €13,422

NSW Fair Trading (the consumer protection regulator of New South Wales) reprimanded Leader Properties Investment Pty Ltd on 9 June 2026 and imposed a monetary penalty of 22,000 AUD because it had locked out a tenant and unlawfully taken possession of the rented home in breach of the Residential Tenancies Act 2010. All licensed agents of the company who provide property management must complete tenancy training. Measures against individuals are not set out here.

What organisations can take from it

Property managers must never lock out tenants on their own authority; evictions only go through the statutory process, and staff must know this.

Relevance to training and awareness

Tenancy law in property management: no self-help evictions or lockouts

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
NSW Fair Trading
Area of law
Consumer protection and online retail
Legal basis
Property and Stock Agents Act 2002 (NSW), s 192(1)(a), (c) und (d); Verstoß gegen den Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Liability of senior managers
Measures against individuals are not set out here.
Published
25 Jun 2026

Original amount 22,000 AUD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Jun 2026.

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

Report an error

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

9 Jun 2026 Deutsche Wohnen SELG Berlin I confirms GDPR infringement by Deutsche Wohnen through tenant archive without deletion function GermanyData breaches and data security 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.

What organisations can take from it

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

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.

28 May 2026 Thermotech Wall and Loft Surveys LtdICO: £240,000 fine for Thermotech over marketing calls to TPS numbers United KingdomMarketing and consent €276,928

The ICO fined Thermotech Wall and Loft Surveys Ltd £240,000 and issued an enforcement notice. After executing a search warrant in April 2025, the regulator found that between October 2024 and March 2025 the company had instigated 575,062 unsolicited marketing calls to numbers that had been on the TPS register for more than 28 days. There were 132 complaints. The legal basis is regulations 21 and 24 of PECR.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Marketing and consent
Legal basis
Regulations 21 und 24 PECR; section 55A DPA 1998
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate

Original amount 240,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 May 2026.

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

Report an error

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

28 May 2026 Timmerhuis Weg & Waterbouw B.V., Bouwhuis Aannemingsmaatschappij „Bouwmij“ B.V., Aannemingsmaatschappij Van Gelder B.V.ACM: cartel fines on construction firms for bid rigging in an Ommen tender NetherlandsCartels and collusion €45,500

In September 2024 three construction companies coordinated their bid prices and decided the winner in a civil engineering tender of the municipality of Ommen, which was awarded for 153,250 EUR. Because of earlier cartel infringements by the companies or their legal predecessors established in 2005, the ACM (Autoriteit Consument & Markt, Dutch competition and consumer authority) increased the fines by 20%. In the simplified procedure it imposed allegedly 30,000 EUR on Timmerhuis and allegedly 15,500 EUR on Bouwhuis (45,500 EUR in total); Van Gelder, as first leniency applicant, was not fined.

What organisations can take from it

Bids in procurement procedures must be prepared independently; even agreeing the winner of a small municipal contract is sanctioned.

Relevance to training and awareness

Bid rigging in public tenders

Authority / court
Autoriteit Consument & Markt (ACM)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 6 Abs. 1 Mededingingswet
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Repeat case
yes
Mitigating circumstances
For cooperating in the simplified procedure, the ACM reduced the fines of Bouwhuis and Timmerhuis by 15%, and that of Timmerhuis by a further 5% for evidence provided voluntarily; Van Gelder, as first applicant, received full leniency immunity.
Published
2 Jun 2026

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

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

22 May 2026 China Harbour Engineering Company LimitedChina Harbour Engineering: 78,000 HKD for discharge into water control zone Hong KongEmissions and permits €8,584

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.

What organisations can take from it

Discharges into waters must be authorised in advance and monitored continuously – a single incident is enough for a criminal conviction in Hong Kong.

Relevance to training and awareness

Water protection and authorised discharges

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

Report an error

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

4 May 2026 Decora S.A., Bel-Pol sp. z o.o.Decora and Bel-Pol: PLN 33.6m for price and territory agreements on flooring accessories PolandCartels and collusion €7.9m

The manufacturer Decora and the wholesaler Bel-Pol had coordinated prices for vinyl panels, underlays, skirting boards and floor profiles from Decora's range and divided the wholesale market for these products. UOKiK imposed fines of PLN 28,344,000 on Decora and PLN 5,290,000 on Bel-Pol, PLN 33,634,000 in total. The decision is not final.

What organisations can take from it

Vertical agreements on prices and territories in wholesale are hardcore restrictions.

Relevance to training and awareness

Price and territory agreements between manufacturer and wholesaler

Authority / court
Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Konkurencji i Konsumentów (UOKiK)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 6 Abs. 1 Nr. 1 und 3 ustawa o ochronie konkurencji i konsumentów; Art. 101 Abs. 1 lit. a und c AEUV; Art. 106 Abs. 1 Nr. 1 und 2, Art. 113c und Art. 89a ustawa o ochronie konkurencji i konsumentów
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
under appeal
Sector
Construction and real estate
Mitigating circumstances
As a leniency applicant, Bel-Pol received a 50% reduction of its fine and a further 10% for voluntarily accepting the fine (settlement).
Liability of senior managers
Measures against individuals are not reported here.

Original amount 33,634,000 PLN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 4 May 2026.

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

Report an error

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

24 Apr 2026 White Ray Oakleigh Pty Ltd (Ray White Oakleigh)Federal Court: 600,000 AUD against former operator of Ray White Oakleigh for underquoting AustraliaMisleading advertising and pricing €366,010

Following action by Consumer Affairs Victoria (the consumer protection regulator of the state of Victoria), the Federal Court of Australia ordered White Ray Oakleigh Pty Ltd, former operator of the Ray White Oakleigh agency, to pay 600,000 AUD because between February 2022 and November 2023 it advertised nine properties well below market value and at prices it did not itself expect to achieve (underquoting). According to the regulator, the agency agreements often provided for considerably higher commission on proceeds above the reserve price, and vendors were persuaded to lower their reserves after signing; text messages between the agents showed that they expected considerably higher prices. The court found misleading or deceptive conduct and false or misleading representations.

What organisations can take from it

Prices in property advertising must reflect the agent's genuine estimate; commission models that reward bait pricing are a compliance risk in their own right.

Relevance to training and awareness

Truthful price information in property advertising (underquoting)

Authority / court
Consumer Affairs Victoria / Federal Court of Australia
Area of law
Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
Legal basis
Irreführendes Verhalten sowie falsche oder irreführende Angaben (Vorschriften in der Mitteilung nicht genannt)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Construction and real estate
Culpability
intentional
Mitigating circumstances
The company admitted the conduct and cooperated with the regulator in the court proceedings; it has not operated the agency since 2025.
Published
24 Apr 2026

Original amount 600,000 AUD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 24 Apr 2026.

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

Report an error

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

Load 20 more of 107

Ready for training that actually lands?

Try the combination for free: automated administration for you, learning formats that fit your team, with no minimum or credit card.

Start 14-day free trial