Compliance Radar

Who was sanctioned, and for what?

Fines, court rulings and incidents from Europe and North America: 756 cases from 32 jurisdictions, each with an official source and checked against that source before publication. Filter by country, area of law and sector. Click a chart to drill down one level.

5cases from 4 jurisdictions
€488mTotal of monetary amounts (4 cases with an amount)
€462.6mLargest single case: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (Teva-Gruppe)
€12.3mMedian per case with an amount

Click a bar to drill down one level.

When?

per quarter, by date of decision
Trend
PeriodCasesTotal
Q3 20230—
Q4 20231€13.4m
Q1 20240—
Q2 20240—
Q3 20240—
Q4 20241€462.6m
Q1 20251€800,000
Q2 20251€11.2m
Q3 20251—
Q4 20250—
Q1 20260—
Q2 20260—
Q3 20260—

5 cases

31 Oct 2024 Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (Teva-Gruppe)EU: 462.6 million EUR against Teva for patent misuse and disparaging a competing medicine EU levelAbuse of market power €462.6m

Teva abused its dominant position for the MS medicine Copaxone: it artificially extended patent protection by filing staggered divisional applications with the EPO and strategically withdrawing them, and spread misleading statements about an authorised competing product among physicians and decision-makers. Seven Member States were affected over periods of four to nine years.

What organisations can take from it

Communications by sales representatives and medical affairs about competing products must be substantiated and objective; patent strategies of dominant companies require competition law review.

Relevance to training and awareness

Disparaging statements about competing products to healthcare professionals

Authority / court
Europäische Kommission
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Art. 102 AEUV
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
Employees
10,000 or more

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.

25 Jul 2025 Tamro Eesti OÜTamro Eesti: order against unfair payment terms for food supplements EstoniaAbuse of market power Order

In consignment agreements, the pharmaceutical wholesaler had made payment to suppliers of food supplements dependent on subsequent resale (payment period over 30 days) and had reserved the right to hold suppliers liable for spoiled goods. The Konkurentsiamet (Estonian Competition Authority) found infringements of the act on unfair trading practices in the food supply chain and ordered amended contractual terms.

What organisations can take from it

Purchasing terms in the food sector – including for food supplements – must comply with the 30-day payment period and the prohibition on shifting risk.

Authority / court
Konkurentsiamet (Estnische Wettbewerbsbehörde)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
§ 4 Abs. 1 und 2, § 5 Abs. 2, § 7 Abs. 1 PTEKS (UTP-Richtlinie (EU) 2019/633)
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals

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.

24 Apr 2025 Johnson & Johnson Consumer NV; Boehringer Ingelheim SComm; Haleon Belgium NVJohnson & Johnson, Boehringer, Haleon: 11.2 million EUR for shelf-placement collusion in pharmacies BelgiumCartels and collusion €11.2m

Over more than 15 years, the three OTC medicine manufacturers jointly developed the category management project ‘SMAN’, through which they steered the placement of non-prescription medicines in selected pharmacies in their favour and disadvantaged or excluded competing products. In a settlement procedure, the Autorité belge de la Concurrence / Belgische Mededingingsautoriteit (Belgian Competition Authority, BMA) imposed a total of 11,249,280.48 EUR.

What organisations can take from it

Category management agreements with retailers must not push competitors off the shelf – joint planograms with competitors are off limits.

Relevance to training and awareness

Competition law limits of category management

Authority / court
Autorité belge de la Concurrence / Belgische Mededingingsautoriteit (BMA)
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Code de droit économique Art. IV.1; AEUV Art. 101
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
Employees
10,000 or more
Published
24 Apr 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.

20 Jan 2025 Pharnext SAPharnext: FDA setbacks disclosed late and glossed over FranceDisclosure and reporting obligations €800,000

The biotech company did not disclose as soon as possible the FDA's request for an additional study on PXT-3003 and the subsequent rejection of an SPA application, and disseminated misleading communications to shareholders. Sanctions: Pharnext 500,000 EUR, former CEO Daniel Cohen 200,000 EUR, former CEO David Horn Solomon 100,000 EUR.

What organisations can take from it

Negative feedback from regulatory authorities is regularly inside information and must not be given a positive spin in letters to shareholders.

Authority / court
Autorité des marchés financiers (AMF), Commission des sanctions
Area of law
Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations
Legal basis
Art. 17 MAR; Art. 12 Abs. 1 lit. c und Art. 15 MAR
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
under appeal
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
Liability of senior managers
Daniel Cohen (co-founder, directeur général until April 2020): 200,000 EUR; David Horn Solomon (directeur général from April 2020): 100,000 EUR
Sources

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.

19 Oct 2023 Alkaloids of Australia, Alkaloids Corporation, Boehringer, Linnea, Transo-Pharm (C2 PHARMA Kronzeuge)EU: 13.4 million EUR against pharmaceutical ingredient cartel (SNBB for Buscopan) EU levelCartels and collusion €13.4m

From 2005 to 2019, six manufacturers and traders of the active ingredient SNBB (the base substance for Buscopan and generics) fixed minimum prices, allocated quotas and exchanged sensitive information. This was the first cartel concerning an active pharmaceutical ingredient that the Commission has sanctioned; C2 PHARMA received full immunity, and all parties reached a settlement.

What organisations can take from it

Even small niche markets for active ingredients are in the spotlight – contacts with competitors about prices or volumes are off-limits.

Relevance to training and awareness

Price and quota agreements in the trade in active ingredients

Authority / court
Europäische Kommission
Area of law
Competition law · Cartels and collusion
Legal basis
Art. 101 AEUV, Art. 53 EWR-Abkommen
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Chemicals and pharmaceuticals
Mitigating circumstances
Leniency programme (C2 PHARMA 100 %, Transo-Pharm 50 %, Linnea 30 %), 10 % settlement reduction

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