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 authority- Competition Tribunal of South Africa (auf Antrag der Competition Commission) €228,814 100 % · 2 cases
- Department of Employment and Labour (Inspection and Enforcement Services) – 0 % · 1 case
What for?
by area of lawAll areas of law
Who?
by company- Anonymised companies €182,794 80 % · 2 cases
- Vermont Sales (Pty) Ltd €46,020 20 % · 1 case
When?
per year, by date of decision| Period | Cases | Total |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 1 | – |
| 2023 | 1 | €182,794 |
| 2024 | 0 | – |
| 2025 | 1 | €46,020 |
| 2026 | 0 | – |
3 cases
4 Mar 2025 Vermont Sales (Pty) LtdCompetition Tribunal: allegedly ZAR 900,000 against Vermont Sales over discount cap for dealers €46,020
The importer and wholesaler of power tools allegedly prohibited dealers without their own stock from advertising Festool products below the recommended list price and allowed a maximum discount of 15% (minimum resale price maintenance). In a settlement without admission of liability, Vermont allegedly pays ZAR 900,000 in three instalments and introduces a compliance programme with annually updated training.
Rules on advertised price levels or maximum discount rates imposed on dealers can also amount to prohibited resale price maintenance.
Discount rules and advertising restrictions for dealers
Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.
- Authority / court
- Competition Tribunal of South Africa (auf Antrag der Competition Commission)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- Competition Act 89 of 1998, s. 5(2); ss. 49D, 58(1)(a)(iii), 58(1)(b), 59
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Retail and e-commerce
- Mitigating circumstances
- Vermont approached the Commission on its own initiative to settle the matter amicably; training had already started.
- Published
- 4 Mar 2025
Original amount 900,000 ZAR, converted at the ECB reference rate of 4 Mar 2025.
Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
3 Apr 2023 two South African companies in a supply partnershipExcessive hand sanitiser prices charged to the police: ZAR 3.55m penalty €182,794
On 3 April 2023 the Competition Tribunal (South Africa's competition adjudicator) found that a supplier of occupational health products, acting within a partnership with an investment company, had charged the South African Police Service excessive prices for 10,000 containers of hand sanitiser (25 litres each) supplied in April 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic – 3,550 ZAR per container including VAT, more than double the National Treasury list price at the time. In the Tribunal's view the pandemic gave the reseller market power; the excess profit exceeded 9 million ZAR. Both companies are jointly and severally liable for an administrative penalty of 3,550,000 ZAR.
In a crisis even a small reseller can hold market power – mark-ups charged to public buyers must be justifiable by costs.
Pricing in crises and in public procurement
- Authority / court
- Competition Tribunal of South Africa (auf Antrag der Competition Commission)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Abuse of market power
- Legal basis
- Section 8(1)(a) Competition Act 89 of 1998 (Preishöhenmissbrauch/excessive pricing; Beweislast nach Section 8(2))
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Retail and e-commerce
- Repeat case
- no
- Mitigating circumstances
- First offence; in the Tribunal's view the aggravating factors (exploiting the pandemic) clearly outweighed it.
- Published
- 3 Apr 2023
Original amount 3,550,000 ZAR, converted at the ECB reference rate of 3 Apr 2023.
Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 3 Apr 2025 · Direct link
Report an error
27 Sep 2022 a South African online retailerWorkplace safety inspection: prohibition notices for an online retailer's warehouse Order
During a blitz inspection on 27 September 2022, inspectors of the Department of Employment and Labour (South African labour ministry) found breaches of several regulations under the Occupational Health and Safety Act 85 of 1993 at an online retailer's warehouse, including rules on ergonomics, pressure equipment, hazardous chemical agents and driven machinery. The company received three prohibition notices – against contractors' step-ladders without non-slip rubber feet, against storing flammable chemicals in the general storage area and against deducting the cost of safety shoes from wages – as well as a direction to improve its clinic, set up marked driveways inside the warehouse and improve its risk assessment; the department allowed 60 days from service for this. Compliance orders were also issued for breaches of UIF, COIDA and BCEA provisions.
Labour inspections look at everyday details such as chemical storage, contractors' equipment and who pays for protective gear – shortcomings lead directly to prohibitions and short deadlines.
Health and safety in logistics warehouses: hazardous substances, work equipment, protective gear
- Authority / court
- Department of Employment and Labour (Inspection and Enforcement Services)
- Area of law
- Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents
- Legal basis
- Occupational Health and Safety Act 85 of 1993 (Ergonomics, Pressure Equipment, General Administration, Hazardous Chemical Agent, Driven Machinery und General Safety Regulations); Compliance Orders nach Unemployment Insurance Fund Act, Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act und Basic Conditions of Employment Act (Bezeichnungen laut Pressemitteilung)
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Retail and e-commerce
- Published
- 28 Sep 2022
Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 27 Sep 2024 · Direct link