Compliance Radar

Who was sanctioned, and for what?

Fines, court rulings and incidents from Europe and North America: 718 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.

DACH Austria Media and online platforms Clear all filters

4cases from 1 jurisdiction

€7,570Total of monetary amounts (3 cases with an amount)

€6,200Largest single case: DSB: fine against news portal that ignored instruction on cookie banner

€870Median per case with an amount

Click a bar to drill down one level.

by amount by number of cases

Where?

by authority

Datenschutzbehörde (DSB) €7,070 93 % · 2 cases
Kommunikationsbehörde Austria (KommAustria) €500 7 % · 2 cases

What for?

by area of law

All areas of law

Who?

by company

When?

per quarter, by date of decision

Trend
Period	Cases	Total
Q3 2023	0	—
Q4 2023	0	—
Q1 2024	0	—
Q2 2024	0	—
Q3 2024	0	—
Q4 2024	0	—
Q1 2025	0	—
Q2 2025	0	—
Q3 2025	2	€7,070
Q4 2025	0	—
Q1 2026	0	—
Q2 2026	0	—
Q3 2026	2	€500

4 cases

Newest first Highest amounts

19 Aug 2026 WH Media GmbHKommAustria penalises person responsible for W24 over advertising in news programme AustriaMisleading advertising and pricing €500

On 29 May 2024, the Vienna broadcaster W24 aired advertising in split screen within the programme ‘24 Stunden Wien’, did not adequately separate advertising from programming and, at around 50 minutes, significantly exceeded the permitted 12 minutes of advertising per hour. The Austrian Communications Authority (Kommunikationsbehörde Austria, KommAustria) imposed fines totalling 500 EUR (plus 50 EUR in costs) on the body authorised to represent the company externally; the GmbH is jointly and severally liable under § 9 (7) VStG (Austrian Administrative Penal Act).

What organisations can take from it

Advertising time limits and the separation requirement also apply to small regional broadcasters – management is personally liable via § 9 VStG.

Authority / court: Kommunikationsbehörde Austria (KommAustria)
Area of law: Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
Legal basis: § 64 Abs. 2 Z 9 i. V. m. §§ 43 Abs. 2, 44 Abs. 1, 45 Abs. 1 AMD-G; § 9 VStG
Action: Fine
Status of proceedings: final
Sector: Media and online platforms
Culpability: negligent
Mitigating circumstances: No previous record, duration of proceedings, remorseful confession and remedial measures initiated.
Liability of senior managers: Fine imposed on the body responsible externally (§ 9 (1) VStG); the company is jointly and severally liable.
Published: 19 Aug 2026

Sources

KommAustria, Straferkenntnis KOA 05.910 / 2025-0.418.178-6-A (W24) Decision of an authority

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

29 Jul 2026 Österreichischer Rundfunk (ORF)KommAustria finds unlabelled product placement in ORF's ‘Sport aktuell’ AustriaMisleading advertising and pricing Order

In the programme ‘Sport aktuell’ on ORF 1 on 29 July 2025, a logo wall was visible as product placement without being labelled. The Austrian Communications Authority (Kommunikationsbehörde Austria, KommAustria) found, with final effect, a violation of the ORF Act (ORF-Gesetz).

What organisations can take from it

Product placements must be identified and labelled by the editorial team – including logo walls in the background.

Relevance to training and awareness

Labelling of advertising and product placement

Authority / court: Kommunikationsbehörde Austria (KommAustria)
Area of law: Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
Legal basis: § 16 Abs. 5 Z 4 ORF-G
Action: Order
Status of proceedings: final
Sector: Media and online platforms
Published: 29 Jul 2026

Sources

KommAustria, Entscheidung 2025-0.606.040-3-A (ORF, Sport aktuell) Decision of an authority

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

4 Sep 2025 A*** GmbH (Werbeagentur, im Bescheid pseudonymisiert)Austrian advertising agency: 870 EUR – alert about security gap dismissed as spam AustriaIncident reporting obligations €870

Customer data (including names, e-mail addresses, dates of birth, telephone numbers) could be retrieved via an unprotected development server of the advertising agency. An employee took the first alert from an external party in January 2025 to be spam; only a second alert in February reached management, which closed the gap but only notified the incident on 2 May 2025 after being requested to do so by the Datenschutzbehörde (Austrian Data Protection Authority, DSB). The authority attributed the employee’s conduct to the company.

What organisations can take from it

External alerts about security gaps need a clear intake channel – what ends up in spam still counts as known.

Relevance to training and awareness

Recognising and escalating alerts about security gaps

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court: Datenschutzbehörde (DSB)
Area of law: Information security and cyber · Incident reporting obligations
Legal basis: Art. 33 Abs. 1 iVm Art. 83 Abs. 4 lit. a DSGVO
Action: Fine
Status of proceedings: final
Sector: Media and online platforms
Culpability: negligent
Mitigating circumstances: No previous infringements and cooperation in the proceedings; gap closed immediately after the second alert, employees trained subsequently.

Sources

DSB, Straferkenntnis GZ 2025-0.699.550 vom 04.09.2025 (RIS) Decision of an authority

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

6 Aug 2025 DSB: fine against news portal that ignored instruction on cookie banner AustriaCookies and tracking €6,200

In 2023, the Austrian data protection authority (Datenschutzbehörde, DSB) had ordered a local news portal (a media GmbH & Co KG, name pseudonymised) by decision to offer, on the first layer of the cookie banner, an equivalent option to close it without consent. Because the company did not implement this from October 2024 until at least March 2025, the DSB imposed 6,200 EUR for failure to comply with an instruction; the penalty decision is final.

What organisations can take from it

Implement orders of the supervisory authority on time – ignoring them risks a separate fine in addition to the original infringement.

Authority / court: Datenschutzbehörde (DSB)
Area of law: Data protection · Cookies and tracking
Legal basis: Art. 58 Abs. 2 lit. d i. V. m. Art. 83 Abs. 6 DSGVO; Art. 7 DSGVO
Action: Fine
Status of proceedings: final
Sector: Media and online platforms

Sources

DSB Straferkenntnis GZ 2025-0.276.820 vom 06.08.2025 (RIS) Decision of an authority

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

How the radar is compiled

Official sources only

Every case is based on a decision, press release or database of an authority or a court. Press and law-firm reports count at most as additional references.

Four-eyes check

Whoever enters a case may not approve it. A second, independent check compares company, date, amount and area of law with the source. Only then is the case published.

Comparable amounts

Amounts are converted at the ECB reference rate on the day of the decision. Each case also shows the original amount.

Corrections on record

A correction is a new version that is checked again. Every change is logged. You can report errors directly on each case.

Case texts are translated from the German original. Where a translation is not yet available, the German text is shown and marked “(German original)”. Names of authorities, laws and companies are given as in the source.

The radar reports on published decisions and is not legal advice. Decisions that are not yet final are marked as such where the status is known.

Embed the radar on your website

Who was sanctioned, and for what?

Ready for training that sticks?