Compliance Radar

Who was sanctioned, and for what?

Fines, court rulings and incidents from Europe, North America, Latin America and Asia-Pacific: 1,846 cases from 39 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
–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.

When?

per quarter, by date of decision
Trend
PeriodCasesTotal
Q4 20230–
Q1 20240–
Q2 20240–
Q3 20240–
Q4 20240–
Q1 20251–
Q2 20251–
Q3 20250–
Q4 20250–
Q1 20260–
Q2 20260–
Q3 20260–
Q4 20260–

2 cases

15 May 2025 Greater Manchester PoliceICO: Reprimand for Greater Manchester Police over subject access request backlog United KingdomData subject rights and transparency Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police. The ICO found that, because of a persistent backlog of historic requests, the force repeatedly failed to answer subject access requests on time. The ICO found infringements of both the UK GDPR and the law-enforcement provisions of the DPA 2018.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency
Legal basis
Art. 12(3) und Art. 15 UK GDPR; section 45 und section 54 DPA 2018 (Part 3); Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector
Employees
10,000 or more

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

14 Mar 2025 Greater Manchester PoliceICO: Reprimand for Greater Manchester Police over lost CCTV footage and late subject access response United KingdomData breaches and data security Reprimand or warning

The ICO issued a reprimand to the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police. The ICO found that CCTV footage from a police station custody suite in 2021, which was to be retained because of serious allegations against officers, was not checked for completeness when it was preserved and was partly lost. In addition, the individual concerned did not receive their data on time after a subject access request. The action was based on the law-enforcement processing rules in the DPA 2018.

Authority / court
Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)
Area of law
Data protection · Data breaches and data security
Legal basis
section 45(3)(a) und (b) DPA 2018; sechster Datenschutzgrundsatz (section 40 DPA 2018, Part 3)
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Public sector
Employees
10,000 or more

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

Ready for training that actually lands?

Try the combination for free: automated administration for you, learning formats that fit your team, with no minimum or credit card.

Start 14-day free trial