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.

3cases from 1 jurisdiction
—Total of monetary amounts (0 cases with an amount)
—Largest single case
—Median per case with an amount

Click a bar to drill down one level.

Where?

by authority
  1. Konkurrencerådet (Danish Competition Council) — 0 % · 2 cases
  2. Anklagemyndigheden (Bødeforelæg) auf Anzeige der Datatilsynet — 0 % · 1 case

What for?

by area of law

All areas of law

  1. Data protection — 0 % · 1 case
  2. Competition law — 0 % · 1 case
  3. AI and digital regulation — 0 % · 1 case

Who?

by company
  1. Gyldendal A/S — 0 % · 1 case
  2. Meta Platforms Ireland Limited — 0 % · 1 case
  3. Wolt Denmark — 0 % · 1 case

When?

per quarter, by date of decision
Trend
PeriodCasesTotal
Q3 20230—
Q4 20230—
Q1 20240—
Q2 20240—
Q3 20240—
Q4 20240—
Q1 20250—
Q2 20250—
Q3 20250—
Q4 20250—
Q1 20260—
Q2 20262—
Q3 20261—

3 cases

26 Aug 2026 Wolt DenmarkWolt: Competition Council finds abuse of dominant position vis-à-vis restaurants DenmarkAbuse of market power Order

In 2022–2024, the delivery service used a standard clause to prohibit restaurants from being cheaper on their own channels than on Wolt, while at the same time being able to grant discounts without consultation and to compensate customers up to 400 DKK at the restaurants’ expense. The Konkurrencerådet (Danish Competition Council) ordered the practice to cease, required Wolt to inform all restaurants and intends to enforce a fine through the courts.

What organisations can take from it

Platforms with a high market share should have parity clauses and unilateral cost shifting in standard terms reviewed under competition law.

Authority / court
Konkurrencerådet (Danish Competition Council)
Area of law
Competition law · Abuse of market power
Legal basis
Konkurrenceloven; AEUV Art. 102
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Media and online platforms
Published
26 Aug 2026

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 Jun 2026 Meta Platforms Ireland LimitedMeta: infringement of the P2B Regulation after fashion retailer’s Facebook page was hacked DenmarkPlatform obligations Order

After the Facebook page of the Danish fashion retailer Clothing By Ros ApS was hacked in 2023, Meta failed to respond appropriately for almost two years, gave no reasons for the de facto suspension and offered no effective complaint-handling procedure. The Konkurrencerådet (Danish Competition Council) found infringements of the P2B Regulation and ordered Meta to comply with the rules on statements of reasons and complaint handling in future.

What organisations can take from it

Platform operators must give reasons for suspending business users and handle complaints promptly – silence counts as a decision in its own right.

Authority / court
Konkurrencerådet (Danish Competition Council)
Area of law
AI and digital regulation · Platform obligations
Legal basis
Verordnung (EU) 2019/1150 (P2B) Art. 4, Art. 11
Action
Order
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Media and online platforms
Employees
10,000 or more
Published
24 Jun 2026

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.

14 Apr 2026 Gyldendal A/SGyldendal: fine for storing data of 685,000 former book club members for years DenmarkData protection Fine

The publisher kept data of around 685,000 former book club members in a ‘passive database’, in around 395,000 cases more than ten years after they had left, without any deletion rules. The Danish Data Protection Agency (Datatilsynet) had recommended a fine of 1 million DKK in 2022; the case was closed on 14 April 2026 with a fine notice whose amount is not stated in the source.

What organisations can take from it

‘Passive’ legacy data also needs a deletion concept – storage without a purpose is a separate infringement.

Authority / court
Anklagemyndigheden (Bødeforelæg) auf Anzeige der Datatilsynet
Area of law
Data protection
Legal basis
DSGVO Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. e, Art. 5 Abs. 2
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Media and online platforms
Mitigating circumstances
Cooperative conduct; only two employees had access to the passive database; deletion after the supervisory visit.

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