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.
Click a bar to drill down one level.
Where?
by countryWhat for?
by area of lawAll areas of law
Who?
by companyWhen?
per quarter, by date of decision| Period | Cases | Total |
|---|---|---|
| Q3 2023 | 0 | — |
| Q4 2023 | 0 | — |
| Q1 2024 | 0 | — |
| Q2 2024 | 0 | — |
| Q3 2024 | 2 | €2.38m |
| Q4 2024 | 0 | — |
| Q1 2025 | 1 | €70m |
| Q2 2025 | 2 | €6.01m |
| Q3 2025 | 1 | €195,000 |
| Q4 2025 | 2 | €379,504 |
| Q1 2026 | 0 | — |
| Q2 2026 | 1 | — |
| Q3 2026 | 0 | — |
9 cases
17 Apr 2026 Cream della Cream Switzerland GmbH und Philipp Plein International AGFDPIC ruling: Philipp Plein and Cream della Cream ignored objections to advertising Order
Both companies continued to use e-mail addresses and telephone numbers from online purchases for advertising, although data subjects had objected – in some cases after deletion had been confirmed. The Swiss Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner (Eidgenössischer Datenschutz- und Öffentlichkeitsbeauftragter, EDÖB) ordered the processing for advertising to cease and the data to be deleted on request.
An objection to advertising must take effect across all systems – a confirmed deletion followed by further advertising violates the principle of good faith.
Handling objections to advertising and deletion requests
- Authority / court
- Eidgenössischer Datenschutz- und Öffentlichkeitsbeauftragter (EDÖB)
- Area of law
- Data protection · Marketing and consent
- Legal basis
- DSG Art. 6, Art. 30 Abs. 2 lit. b, Art. 31
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Retail and e-commerce
- Published
- 26 Jun 2026
- Verfügung des EDÖB gegen Cream della Cream Switzerland GmbH und Philipp Plein International AG Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
16 Dec 2025 Hardeck Möbel GmbH & Co. KGFurniture retailer Hardeck: 379,503 EUR fine for breach of AML due diligence obligations €379,504
The Arnsberg regional government (Bezirksregierung Arnsberg), as anti-money laundering supervisor for the non-financial sector, imposed a fine of 379,503.50 EUR, final since 16 December 2025, on the furniture retailer as a dealer in goods for breach of due diligence obligations under the German Money Laundering Act (Geldwäschegesetz, GwG). Karl-Ernst Hardeck is named as the person responsible for the company.
Furniture retailers, as dealers in goods, are also obliged entities under the GwG – breaches of due diligence obligations can trigger six-figure fines.
Identification for cash payments in the trade in goods
- Authority / court
- Bezirksregierung Arnsberg (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
- Retail and e-commerce
- Liability of senior managers
- The announcement names Karl-Ernst Hardeck as the person responsible for the infringement
- Bekanntmachung nach § 57 GwG – Bezirksregierung Arnsberg Official register or notice
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
9 Oct 2025 BGH: price reduction only permissible with a clearly legible 30-day lowest price 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).
In all discount advertising, state the 30-day lowest price as clearly as the discount itself.
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
- Unzulässige Werbung mit einer Preisermäßigung (Nr. 184/2025) Court press release
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
30 Sep 2025 HmbBfDI: 195,000 EUR against retailer over ignored data subject requests €195,000
A retail company (name not published) had advertising letters sent via service providers and, in several cases, failed for an extended period to respond in time to the data subject rights that recipients then asserted. The Hamburg Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information (HmbBfDI) imposed a fine of 195,000 EUR; the measure was published in the interim report of 30 September 2025 (exact date of the decision not stated).
Companies that send advertising must have a working process for access and objection requests – even if the mailing is outsourced.
Timely handling of access requests
- Authority / court
- Hamburgischer Beauftragter für Datenschutz und Informationsfreiheit (HmbBfDI)
- Area of law
- Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency
- Legal basis
- DSGVO (Betroffenenrechte)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Retail and e-commerce
- Published
- 30 Sep 2025
- Zwischenbilanz 2025: HmbBfDI verhängt Bußgelder von insgesamt 775.000 Euro Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
20 Jun 2025 Saxony: 7,000 EUR fine against art dealer over due diligence obligations and risk management €7,000
The Saxony State Directorate (Landesdirektion Sachsen), as anti-money laundering supervisor for the non-financial sector, imposed a fine of 7,000 EUR on an art dealer, announced in anonymised form, for breaches of the due diligence obligations and risk management requirements under the German Money Laundering Act (GwG). The authority had previously issued several orders on risk management in the art trade, backed by the threat of penalty payments.
Art dealers need a written risk analysis and must identify buyers for transactions of 10,000 EUR or more.
AML obligations in the art trade
- Authority / court
- Landesdirektion Sachsen (Geldwäscheaufsicht Nichtfinanzsektor)
- Area of law
- Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls
- Legal basis
- Geldwäschegesetz (Sorgfaltspflichten, Risikomanagement); Bekanntmachung nach § 57 GwG
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Retail and e-commerce
- Bekanntmachungen gemäß § 57 GwG – Landesdirektion Sachsen (lfd. Nr. 36) Official register or notice
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
7 May 2025 Sennheiser electronic SE & Co. KG, Sonova Consumer Hearing Sales Germany GmbHBundeskartellamt: almost 6 million EUR against Sennheiser and Sonova over resale price maintenance €6m
Since at least 2015, Sennheiser coordinated consumer prices for premium headphones with dealers, monitored them using price comparison services and specialist software and intervened when prices were too low; Sonova continued this after acquiring the business unit in March 2022 until September 2022. The employees had received competition law training but used this knowledge to conceal their conduct (code language). The Bundeskartellamt imposed fines of almost 6 million EUR on both companies and three responsible employees (settlement).
Price monitoring software is no licence: anyone who responds to deviations by putting pressure on dealers is engaging in prohibited resale price maintenance – and employees are personally liable.
Price discussions with dealers and price monitoring
Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.
- Authority / court
- Bundeskartellamt
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- § 1 GWB (vertikale Preisbindung)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Retail and e-commerce
- Mitigating circumstances
- Extensive cooperation and settlement
- Liability of senior managers
- Fines imposed on three responsible employees (not named)
- Published
- 7 May 2025
- Bundeskartellamt verhängt Bußgelder gegen Audioprodukte-Hersteller Sennheiser und Sonova Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
28 Jan 2025 OGH raises gun-jumping fine against food retailer from 1.5 to 70 million EUR €70m
A food retail group anonymised in the decision (R*) had, through its subsidiary, implemented a notifiable concentration without merger control clearance by means of a long-term lease of store space in a shopping centre (1 July 2018 to 20 September 2022). The Cartel Court (Kartellgericht) imposed a fine of 1.5 million EUR; Austria's Supreme Court (Oberster Gerichtshof, OGH) upheld the appeals of the Federal Competition Authority (Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde, BWB) and the Federal Cartel Prosecutor (Bundeskartellanwalt) and set the fine at 70 million EUR, taking into account the group turnover of 92.3 billion EUR and an earlier fine for prohibited implementation.
Taking over stores by way of a lease or tenancy agreement can also be a notifiable concentration – expansion departments must check merger control requirements.
Notification requirement for site takeovers through leases or tenancy agreements
- Authority / court
- Oberster Gerichtshof als Kartellobergericht (Antrag der Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Merger control
- Legal basis
- § 29 Z 1 lit a iVm § 17 Abs 1 KartG 2005
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Retail and e-commerce
- Repeat case
- yes
- OGH 16 Ok 5/24g vom 28.01.2025 Court decision
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
16 Aug 2024 DSB: 1.5 million EUR against retail chain over cameras on self-checkouts, PIN pad and surroundings €1.5m
In 2022, a retail company (name pseudonymised) used nine cameras in one branch to film, among other things, the self-service checkouts including the keypad of the card payment terminal, as well as public areas, bus stops and neighbouring properties. The Austrian data protection authority (Datenschutzbehörde, DSB) imposed 1.5 million EUR for lack of a legal basis and infringement of data minimisation; the Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht, BVwG) confirmed the amount on 25 July 2025, and an appeal on points of law is pending.
Align cameras in retail closely with their protective purpose – PIN entries, public spaces and neighbouring properties must not be in the frame.
- Authority / court
- Datenschutzbehörde (DSB)
- Area of law
- Data protection · Video surveillance
- Legal basis
- Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. a und c, Art. 6 Abs. 1 DSGVO
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- under appeal
- Sector
- Retail and e-commerce
- DSB Straferkenntnis GZ 2023-0.680.196 vom 16.08.2024 (RIS) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
17 Jul 2024 Electronics for Orlan-10 drones: 6 years 9 months' imprisonment for Saarland trader €880,000
From January 2020 to May 2023, a 59-year-old German-Russian supplied more than 120,000 electronic components in 54 instances to Russian arms manufacturers, including for the Orlan 10 reconnaissance drone, and after February 2022 named sham recipients in Hong Kong and Kyrgyzstan. The 7th Criminal Division of the Stuttgart Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgericht Stuttgart, Ref. 7 St 3 BJs 119/23) sentenced him to six years and nine months, a co-defendant to one year and nine months suspended, and ordered the confiscation of 880,000 EUR.
Electronics traders must check end users: standard components end up in Russian drones, and sham recipients in third countries do not protect against punishment.
- Authority / court
- Oberlandesgericht Stuttgart, 7. Strafsenat (Az. 7 St 3 BJs 119/23)
- Area of law
- Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes
- Legal basis
- § 18 Außenwirtschaftsgesetz i. V. m. Verordnung (EU) Nr. 833/2014
- Action
- Custodial sentence
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Retail and e-commerce
- Culpability
- intentional
- Liability of senior managers
- Managing director of two trading companies personally sentenced to imprisonment.
- Published
- 17 Jul 2024
- OLG Stuttgart, 7. Strafsenat: Zwei Angeklagte wegen Lieferung von Elektronikbauteilen für militärisches Gerät nach Russland verurteilt (17.07.2024) Court press release
- Generalbundesanwalt: Anklage wegen mutmaßlicher Verstöße gegen das Außenwirtschaftsgesetz erhoben (05.03.2024) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link