Compliance Radar
Who was sanctioned, and for what?
Fines, court rulings and incidents from Europe, North America and Asia-Pacific: 1,838 cases from 37 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 authority- Commerce Commission (ComCom), Neuseeland 1 case 33 % ·
- District Court (Anklage: Commerce Commission) 1 case 33 % · €562,720
- Strafgericht, in der Quelle nicht benannt (Anklage: Commerce Commission) 1 case 33 % · €416,072
What for?
by area of lawAll areas of law
Who?
by companyWhen?
per quarter, by date of decision| Period | Cases | Total |
|---|---|---|
| Q4 2023 | 0 | – |
| Q1 2024 | 0 | – |
| Q2 2024 | 0 | – |
| Q3 2024 | 0 | – |
| Q4 2024 | 0 | – |
| Q1 2025 | 0 | – |
| Q2 2025 | 0 | – |
| Q3 2025 | 1 | – |
| Q4 2025 | 1 | €416,072 |
| Q1 2026 | 0 | – |
| Q2 2026 | 0 | – |
| Q3 2026 | 1 | €562,720 |
| Q4 2026 | 0 | – |
3 cases
6 Aug 2026 Brand Developers Limited (The TV Shop)The TV Shop: 1,104,000 NZD for manipulated online reviews and misleading claims €562,720
The company behind The TV Shop had its own staff post positive product reviews without disclosing the connection, and published one- to three-star reviews only if customers responded to a follow-up email. It also gave customers the impression that they had no rights under the Consumer Guarantees Act beyond a 30-day money-back guarantee, and advertised an accessory pack for the Air Roaster Pro as “free” although it was always included. After a guilty verdict on 13 charges, the District Court imposed 1,104,000 NZD on 6 August 2026; the company had already been fined in 2015 (153,000 NZD) and 2022 (123,500 NZD).
Staff reviews without disclosure and filtering out negative reviews are misleading – review processes need clear rules and oversight.
Authenticity of online reviews and accurate statements on consumer rights
- Authority / court
- District Court (Anklage: Commerce Commission)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Fake reviews
- Legal basis
- Fair Trading Act 1986, ss 10, 13(e), 13(i), 40(1)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Retail and e-commerce
- Culpability
- intentional
- Repeat case
- yes
- Liability of senior managers
- According to the sentencing decision, managers and executives knew about the review practices and at times directed them themselves.
- Published
- 11 Aug 2026
Original amount 1,104,000 NZD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 6 Aug 2026.
- Commerce Commission: The TV Shop to pay $1.104m for conduct that included misleading customers (11.08.2026) Press release of an authority
- Commerce Commission, Case register: Brand Developers Limited t/a TV Shop (PRJ0046693) Official register or notice
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
16 Oct 2025 HelloFresh New Zealand LimitedHelloFresh New Zealand: 845,000 NZD for misleading reactivation of subscriptions €416,072
Between February 2022 and July 2023 the meal-kit provider called former customers, ostensibly to gather feedback but mainly to offer them discount vouchers, without making clear that accepting could reactivate their paid subscription; after more than a million call attempts, almost 80,000 subscriptions were reactivated. After pleading guilty to five charges under s 11 of the Fair Trading Act, the company was fined 845,000 NZD on 16 October 2025.
Anyone reactivating subscriptions by phone must state clearly before the customer agrees that paid deliveries will resume, and must respect a refusal.
Subscription traps and informed consent in telephone sales
- Authority / court
- Strafgericht, in der Quelle nicht benannt (Anklage: Commerce Commission)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- Fair Trading Act 1986, s 11
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Retail and e-commerce
- Published
- 17 Oct 2025
Original amount 845,000 NZD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Oct 2025.
- Commerce Commission: HelloFresh guilty of misleading subscriptions (17.10.2025) Press release of an authority
- Commerce Commission, Case register: HelloFresh New Zealand Limited (PRJ0046462) Official register or notice
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
30 Jul 2025 Kmart NZ Holdings LimitedKmart NZ warned over unsubstantiated “100% sustainably sourced cotton” claim Reprimand or warning
The Commerce Commission (ComCom, New Zealand's competition and consumer regulator) warned Kmart NZ Holdings Limited because, from 4 August 2023 to 4 October 2024, the company advertised own-brand clothing with the claim “100% sustainably sourced cotton” without being able to substantiate it: the cotton sourced as “Better Cotton” was mixed with conventional cotton in the supply chain. The authority considers a breach of s 12A Fair Trading Act 1986 (unsubstantiated representations) likely; only a court could determine one.
Absolute environmental claims such as “100%” require complete proof across the supply chain; a sustainability scheme whose raw material is mixed with conventional material does not support them.
Absolute sustainability claims in advertising only with complete evidence
Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.
- Authority / court
- Commerce Commission (ComCom), Neuseeland
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Misleading environmental and sustainability claims
- Legal basis
- s 12A Fair Trading Act 1986 (Neuseeland)
- Action
- Reprimand or warning
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Retail and e-commerce
- Mitigating circumstances
- Kmart removed the claim from its New Zealand website after the authority raised it and stated that it continues to provide regular compliance training on consumer and competition law.
- Published
- 14 Aug 2025
- Commerce Commission: Kmart investigated and warned by ComCom for greenwashing advertising (14.08.2025) Press release of an authority
- Commerce Commission Case Register: Kmart NZ Holdings Limited (Kmart), PRJ0047592 Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link