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.

2cases from 1 jurisdiction
€9.89mTotal of monetary amounts
€7.51mLargest single case: MM Grupp OÜ
€4.95mMedian per case with an amount

Click a bar to drill down one level.

Where?

by authority
  1. Konkurencijos taryba (Litauischer Wettbewerbsrat) €7.51m 76 % · 1 case
  2. Valstybinė duomenų apsaugos inspekcija (VDAI) €2.39m 24 % · 1 case

What for?

by area of law

All areas of law

  1. Competition law €7.51m 76 % · 1 case
  2. Data protection €2.39m 24 % · 1 case

Who?

by company
  1. MM Grupp OÜ €7.51m 76 % · 1 case
  2. Vinted, UAB €2.39m 24 % · 1 case

When?

per quarter, by date of decision
Trend
PeriodCasesTotal
Q3 20230—
Q4 20230—
Q1 20240—
Q2 20240—
Q3 20241€2.39m
Q4 20240—
Q1 20250—
Q2 20250—
Q3 20250—
Q4 20251€7.51m
Q1 20260—
Q2 20260—
Q3 20260—

2 cases

30 Oct 2025 MM Grupp OÜCinema chain MM Grupp (Apollo) took over Forum Cinemas without clearance – 7.5 million EUR LithuaniaMerger control €7.51m

In 2021, the Estonian parent company of Apollo cinemas acquired control of Forum Cinemas Lithuania before the notified merger had been cleared and integrated the cinemas in Vilnius and Kaunas into its network, even though the Konkurencijos taryba (Lithuanian Competition Council) had provisionally expressed competition concerns. Fine of 7,507,930 EUR (0.8% of consolidated worldwide turnover) and obligation to end the infringement within six months. Source: archived copy of the press release.

What organisations can take from it

No implementation before clearance: restructurings and leases can also constitute prohibited early implementation.

Authority / court
Konkurencijos taryba (Litauischer Wettbewerbsrat)
Area of law
Competition law · Merger control
Legal basis
Konkurencijos įstatymas (Vollzugsverbot bei Zusammenschlüssen)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Media and online platforms
Published
30 Oct 2025

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.

2 Jul 2024 Vinted, UABVinted pays 2.39 million EUR over ‘shadow banning’ and handling of erasure requests LithuaniaData subject rights and transparency €2.39m

Acting on complaints from France and Poland, the Valstybinė duomenų apsaugos inspekcija (Lithuanian State Data Protection Inspectorate, VDAI) found that the second-hand platform rejected erasure requests when users did not state a ‘specific reason’ under Art. 17 GDPR, throttled users without their knowledge through ‘shadow banning’ and could not demonstrate how it handled access requests. Fine of 2,385,276 EUR. Source: archived copy of the press release.

What organisations can take from it

Covert restrictions on users are non-transparent – and erasure requests must not fail on formalities such as a requirement to give reasons.

Authority / court
Valstybinė duomenų apsaugos inspekcija (VDAI)
Area of law
Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency
Legal basis
Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. a, Art. 5 Abs. 2, Art. 12 Abs. 1 und 4 DSGVO
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Media and online platforms
Published
3 Jul 2024

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