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 countryWhat for?
by area of lawAll areas of law
Who?
by company- Anonymised companies €83.5m 86 % · 10 cases
- Ö Aktiengesellschaft (in der Entscheidung abgekürzt; Adressverlag und Direktwerbeunternehmen) €13m 13 % · 1 case
- GmbH (im Urteil anonymisiert) €375,000 0 % · 1 case
- Callcenter (anonymisiert) €259,327 0 % · 2 cases
- Aktiengesellschaft Hallenstadion Zürich (AGH); Ticketcorner AG €122,929 0 % · 1 case
- Callcenter mit Tätigkeitsschwerpunkt im Energiesektor (anonymisiert) €104,400 0 % · 1 case
- D*** GmbH (Digitalmarketing- und Recruitingagentur, anonymisiert) €25,500 0 % · 1 case
When?
per year, by date of decision| Period | Cases | Total |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 1 | €142,000 |
| 2023 | 6 | €82.9m |
| 2024 | 5 | €771,000 |
| 2025 | 3 | €227,329 |
| 2026 | 5 | €13.4m |
20 cases
5 Aug 2026 GmbH (im Urteil anonymisiert)Illegal dumping of construction waste: company must pay €375,000 forfeiture €375,000
The Oberlandesgericht (OLG, Higher Regional Court) Linz added a forfeiture of 375,000 EUR to the conviction of a limited company under the Verbandsverantwortlichkeitsgesetz (VbVG, Austrian Corporate Criminal Liability Act) for intentionally handling and moving waste in a way that endangered the environment; the suspended corporate fine of 30 daily rates of 500 EUR (15,000 EUR) imposed by the Landesgericht (Regional Court) Salzburg remained in place. From May 2021 to May 2024 and again from May 2025 to February 2026, contrary to the AWG 2002 (Waste Management Act) and partly to an official decision, the company had excavated soil, construction waste, asphalt and concrete rubble accepted for payment and deposited on a plot; removal costs were put at around 3.24 million EUR. Only the forfeiture of EUR 375,000 is recorded as the amount; the corporate fine of EUR 15,000 was conditionally suspended.
Anyone accepting and depositing waste without a permit risks not only a corporate fine but also forfeiture of the fees received for it, which can far exceed the fine.
Waste law and official conditions for excavated soil and construction waste
- Authority / court
- Oberlandesgericht Linz (Berufung gegen Urteil des Landesgerichts Salzburg vom 06.03.2026)
- Area of law
- Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances
- Legal basis
- § 181b Abs. 1 und 2 StGB; §§ 3, 4 Abs. 1 und 3, § 6 Abs. 1, § 14 Abs. 1 VbVG; § 20 Abs. 3 StGB; AWG 2002
- Action
- Disgorgement of profits
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Other
- Culpability
- intentional
- Repeat case
- no
- Mitigating circumstances
- No previous convictions of the company; rather low environmental risk. Further circumstances taken into account by the court concern a natural person and are not reported here.
- Liability of senior managers
- Under the VbVG, the company's liability is linked to the conduct of its managing director.
- OLG Linz, 9 Bs 153/26b vom 05.08.2026 (RIS) Court decision
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
24 Jul 2026 Callcenter (anonymisiert)BNetzA: €34,327 fine on call centre, including for incomplete records of consent €34,327
The Bundesnetzagentur (Federal Network Agency) imposed fines totalling 34,327 EUR on a call centre that mainly marketed telecoms products: 32,000 EUR for unlawful telephone advertising and 2,327 EUR because consents to sales calls had not been fully documented. The campaign continued despite the gaps and requests to stop calling were sometimes ignored; the company has appealed.
Consents to telephone marketing must be fully documented – if the proof is missing, the campaign must not continue.
Consent and proof of consent for telephone marketing
- Authority / court
- Bundesnetzagentur (BNetzA)
- Area of law
- Data protection · Marketing and consent
- Legal basis
- UWG – Verbot unerlaubter Telefonwerbung gegenüber Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern; § 7a UWG (Dokumentation und Aufbewahrung von Einwilligungen)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- under appeal
- Sector
- Other
- BNetzA: Bußgelder Unerlaubte Telefonwerbung (laufende Liste mit Einzelmeldungen) Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
16 Jul 2026 BGH: online cancellation page must not offer a "pause contract" alternative Order
On the confirmation page of its online cancellation process, a gym operator displayed a highlighted notice with the button "Pause contract via self-service"; in addition, the confirmation button was labelled "Find contract", which the defendant had already acknowledged. In an action brought by the Federation of German Consumer Organisations (Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband), the BGH ruled that the confirmation page may only contain the information required for the cancellation and the confirmation button, set aside the judgment of the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf (OLG Düsseldorf) dismissing the action to that extent and ordered the operator to cease and desist.
Keep retention or pause offers off the confirmation page of the online cancellation process.
Design of the cancellation process (cancellation button, retention offers)
- Authority / court
- Bundesgerichtshof (I. Zivilsenat), Az. I ZR 200/25
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail
- Legal basis
- § 312k Abs. 1 Satz 1, Abs. 2 BGB (Kündigungsbutton)
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Other
- Published
- 16 Jul 2026
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
24 Jun 2026 Ö Aktiengesellschaft (in der Entscheidung abgekürzt; Adressverlag und Direktwerbeunternehmen)VwGH sets data protection fine for party affinities definitively at 13 million EUR €13m
The company had stored statistically calculated ‘party affinities’ for around 2.2 million people and in some cases sold them to advertising clients – special categories of personal data without consent; in addition, parcel frequency data was further processed for incompatible purposes. The Austrian Data Protection Authority (Datenschutzbehörde, DSB) had imposed 18 million EUR in 2019 and the Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht, BVwG) 16 million EUR in 2024; Austria's Supreme Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgerichtshof, VwGH) has now set the fine with final effect at 13 million EUR (plus 100,000 EUR in procedural costs).
Calculated characteristics such as political leanings are themselves special categories – companies that derive them for advertising need explicit consent.
- Authority / court
- Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Ausgangsbescheid: Datenschutzbehörde)
- Area of law
- Data protection · Marketing and consent
- Legal basis
- DSGVO Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. a und b, Art. 6 Abs. 4, Art. 9 Abs. 1 (VwGH Ro 2025/04/0007)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- reduced
- Sector
- Other
- Culpability
- negligent
- Mitigating circumstances
- Comprehensive cooperation, deletion of the party affinities, settlements with data subjects, long duration of proceedings (5 years, 10 months).
- Published
- 16 Jul 2026
- VwGH 24.06.2026, Ro 2025/04/0007 Court decision
- VwGH bestätigt unrechtmäßige Verarbeitung von Partei-Affinitäten und setzt Geldbuße mit EUR 13 Mio. fest Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
19 Jan 2026 D*** GmbH (Digitalmarketing- und Recruitingagentur, anonymisiert)Recruitment agency: 25,500 EUR for secretly recorded calls with applicants €25,500
The agency conducted telephone pre-screening interviews with applicants on behalf of client companies, recorded them without valid consent, stored them indefinitely and presented itself as the client company in doing so. The Austrian Data Protection Authority (Datenschutzbehörde, DSB) imposed 25,500 EUR (plus 2,550 EUR in costs) for lack of a legal basis and transparency; the company has lodged an appeal against the amount of the fine with the Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht).
Call recordings in recruitment need a genuine legal basis and clear information about who is actually responsible.
Recording of telephone calls and applicant data
- Authority / court
- Datenschutzbehörde
- Area of law
- Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency
- Legal basis
- DSGVO Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. a, c und e, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 12, 13
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- under appeal
- Sector
- Other
- Employees
- Under 50
- Mitigating circumstances
- No relevant previous violations, cooperation in the proceedings; adjustment of the starting amount to the company's small size.
- Datenschutzbehörde, Straferkenntnis 2025-1.049.138 vom 19.01.2026 Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
15 Dec 2025 Aktiengesellschaft Hallenstadion Zürich (AGH); Ticketcorner AGWEKO fines Hallenstadion Zurich and Ticketcorner over ticketing clause €122,929
At the end of 2008 Aktiengesellschaft Hallenstadion Zürich and Ticketcorner AG agreed that the arena would only be let to organisers selling at least 50% of tickets through Ticketcorner, which hindered other ticketing providers. After the Federal Supreme Court found a competition-law infringement in 2020 and remitted the case (2C_113/2017), the Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO, Swiss Competition Commission) classed both companies' conduct in 2009 to 2011 as abuse of a dominant position and, by decision of 15 December 2025, fined the Hallenstadion around CHF 50,000 and Ticketcorner around CHF 65,000. The arena operator had concluded an amicable settlement; the decision can be appealed to the Federal Administrative Court.
Exclusivity clauses between strong market players remain a competition risk, even if the proceedings only end years later.
Exclusivity clauses and tying by dominant undertakings
- Authority / court
- Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Abuse of market power
- Legal basis
- Kartellgesetz (KG): Missbrauch einer marktbeherrschenden Stellung; Rückweisung BGer 2C_113/2017 vom 12.02.2020
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- Mitigating circumstances
- The arena operator concluded an amicable settlement with WEKO.
- Published
- 22 Jan 2026
Original amount 115,000 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Dec 2025.
- WEKO-Medienmitteilung vom 22.01.2026: WEKO büsst Hallenstadion und Ticketcorner Press release of an authority
- Newsroom-Schnittstelle der Bundesverwaltung: Volltext der WEKO-Medienmitteilung vom 22.01.2026 (weko_13429) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
18 Nov 2025 Callcenter mit Tätigkeitsschwerpunkt im Energiesektor (anonymisiert)BNetzA: €104,400 fine on call centre that posed as the customer's energy supplier €104,400
The Bundesnetzagentur (Federal Network Agency) fined a call centre focused on energy marketing 104,400 EUR for unlawful telephone advertising. Callers frequently posed falsely as the local energy provider or as the person's own supplier and tried to disguise the promotional nature of the calls.
Call centres need verifiable consent for every number they dial and must honour requests to stop calling immediately.
Consent and proof of consent for telephone marketing
- Authority / court
- Bundesnetzagentur (BNetzA)
- Area of law
- Data protection · Marketing and consent
- Legal basis
- UWG – Verbot unerlaubter Telefonwerbung gegenüber Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- BNetzA: Bußgelder Unerlaubte Telefonwerbung (laufende Liste mit Einzelmeldungen) Enforcement database of an authority
- BNetzA-Pressemitteilung 26.01.2026: Erneuter Anstieg der Beschwerdezahlen (Bußgelder 2025) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
11 Apr 2025 OGH: gyms may not impose fee increases by way of deemed consent Order
Two gym operators announced a fee increase of 6 EUR a month and treated silence or the failure to exercise a special right of termination as consent. In an action brought by the Austrian Federal Chamber of Labour (Bundesarbeitskammer), the OGH upheld the prohibition of such increases without express agreement and the publication of the judgment; it dismissed claims for repayment and information.
Price increases in ongoing consumer contracts require genuine consent – silence is not enough.
- Authority / court
- Oberster Gerichtshof (OGH), GZ 4 Ob 51/25s
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail
- Legal basis
- § 6 Abs. 1 Z 2, § 28a KSchG; §§ 1a, 14 UWG
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Other
- OGH 4 Ob 51/25s vom 11.04.2025 (RIS Justiz) Court decision
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
27 Dec 2024 Callcenter (anonymisiert)BNetzA: €225,000 fine on call centre over sales calls for electricity and gas contracts €225,000
The Bundesnetzagentur (Federal Network Agency) fined a call centre marketing electricity and gas supply contracts 225,000 EUR for unlawful telephone advertising. According to the agency, the share of complaints about energy sales calls fell in 2024, partly because of its large-scale proceedings in the energy sector.
Call centres need verifiable consent for every number they dial and must honour requests to stop calling immediately.
Consent and proof of consent for telephone marketing
- Authority / court
- Bundesnetzagentur (BNetzA)
- Area of law
- Data protection · Marketing and consent
- Legal basis
- UWG – Verbot unerlaubter Telefonwerbung gegenüber Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- Bundesnetzagentur, Maßnahmen gegen unerlaubte Telefonwerbung mit Archiv-Übersicht der Bußgelder ab 2017 (Übersicht) (Entscheidung 2024) Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link
Report an error
16 Oct 2024 OGH: 100,000 EUR gun-jumping fine for premature start of a mask production joint venture €100,000
A textile company started operations with a joint venture (H* GmbH) for the production of protective masks on 24 April 2020, before the notifiable concentration had been cleared; the infringement lasted until 25 May 2020. The Cartel Court imposed a fine of 5,000 EUR; the OGH increased the fine to 100,000 EUR.
The standstill obligation applies even in emergencies such as the pandemic – a joint venture may only start operating after clearance.
Standstill obligation before clearance (gun-jumping), including in crisis situations
- Authority / court
- Oberster Gerichtshof als Kartellobergericht (Antrag der Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Merger control
- Legal basis
- § 29 Z 1 lit a iVm § 17 Abs 1 KartG 2005
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Other
- Culpability
- intentional
- OGH 16 Ok 4/24k vom 16.10.2024 Court decision
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
14 May 2024 a German call centreBNetzA: €315,000 fine on call centre over unlawful sales calls for energy contracts €315,000
The Bundesnetzagentur (Federal Network Agency) fined a call centre marketing energy supply contracts 315,000 EUR for unlawful telephone advertising. The official list states only the role, the product advertised and the amount; according to the agency's annual review, each of its major fine proceedings in 2024 followed up several hundred to more than 2,000 complaints.
Call centres need verifiable consent for every number they dial and must honour requests to stop calling immediately.
Consent and proof of consent for telephone marketing
- Authority / court
- Bundesnetzagentur (BNetzA)
- Area of law
- Data protection · Marketing and consent
- Legal basis
- UWG – Verbot unerlaubter Telefonwerbung gegenüber Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- Bundesnetzagentur, Maßnahmen gegen unerlaubte Telefonwerbung mit Archiv-Übersicht der Bußgelder ab 2017 (Übersicht) (Entscheidung 2024) Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Version 2 · Company name anonymised since 14 May 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
22 Jan 2024 a German services companyUpper Palatinate labour inspectorate: €120,000 profit skimmed over working-time breaches €120,000
Following a complaint, the Gewerbeaufsichtsamt (labour inspectorate) at the Regierung der Oberpfalz found considerable breaches of the Arbeitszeitgesetz (German Working Hours Act) at a services company, which had not improved at a repeat inspection. The company must pay €120,000 in skimmed-off profit, calculated from the notional gain from the repeated excess working hours; it also committed to investing at least €100,000 in improved processes.
Anyone who fails to stop working-time breaches after a first inspection risks having the resulting gain skimmed off.
Maximum working hours and labour inspectorate checks
- Authority / court
- Gewerbeaufsichtsamt bei der Regierung der Oberpfalz
- Area of law
- Health and safety and employment law · Working time
- Legal basis
- Arbeitszeitgesetz; Gewinnabschöpfung
- Action
- Disgorgement of profits
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- Mitigating circumstances
- The calculation took into account that the company had already taken noticeable measures after the last inspection.
- Published
- 22 Jan 2024
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 22 Jan 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
4 Jan 2024 an Austrian association organising a football leagueFootball league organiser: €11,000 for player data left online €11,000
The DSB (Datenschutzbehörde, Austrian data protection authority) fined an association that organises a football league 11,000 EUR. It had taken no measures to delete player data such as name, photo, year of birth and team completely from its public online database, had not fully complied with an erasure request and had not followed a final erasure order issued by the DSB in 2021. The authority treated the lack of cooperation in the penalty proceedings as an aggravating factor.
Anyone publishing personal data online needs a technical erasure concept from the outset, and orders of the supervisory authority must be implemented on time.
Erasure concepts for publicly accessible databases
- Authority / court
- Datenschutzbehörde (DSB)
- Area of law
- Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency
- Legal basis
- Art. 17, Art. 25 Abs. 1 und Art. 58 Abs. 2 lit. c iVm Art. 83 Abs. 4 lit. a, Abs. 5 lit. a und Abs. 6 DSGVO
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Other
- Culpability
- intentional
- Repeat case
- no
- Mitigating circumstances
- No relevant previous infringements.
- RIS, Entscheidungen der Datenschutzbehörde (Suche) (Entscheidung 2024) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 4 Jan 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
12 Dec 2023 an Austrian companyCompany reports ransomware attack too late and too vaguely: €5,900 fine €5,900
The DSB (Datenschutzbehörde, Austrian data protection authority) fined a limited company 5,900 EUR because it reported a personal data breach caused by a ransomware attack, known since 6 March 2023, only on 24 April 2023, limited the notification to general statements (according to the findings, to satisfy its insurer) and did not respond to the authority's follow-up requests. The DSB treated the late notification as negligent and the other infringements as intentional. Because cooperation was still lacking afterwards, it imposed 600 EUR in a further penalty decision on 7 October 2024.
After a cyber attack, the notification to the data protection authority must be made on time and in full, whatever the insurer requires.
Reporting personal data breaches within 72 hours
- Authority / court
- Datenschutzbehörde (DSB)
- Area of law
- Data protection · Data breaches and data security
- Legal basis
- Art. 33 Abs. 1 und 3 sowie Art. 31 iVm Art. 83 Abs. 1 und 4 lit. a DSGVO
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Other
- Culpability
- intentional
- Repeat case
- no
- Mitigating circumstances
- No relevant previous infringements.
- RIS, Entscheidungen der Datenschutzbehörde (Suche) (Entscheidung 2023) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 12 Dec 2025 · Direct link
Report an error
30 Nov 2023 an international commercial law firmHamburg: commercial law firm must record working time of employed lawyers Order
Following complaints about regular working days lasting until 11 pm or midnight, the Hamburg occupational safety authority ordered an international commercial law firm on 30 November 2023 to record the actual working hours of its employed lawyers, to instruct them accordingly and to explain the partners' responsibility. On 18 July 2025 the Verwaltungsgericht Hamburg (Hamburg Administrative Court) upheld the recording and instruction duties for employed lawyers and set aside only the third order. The judgment is not final; the court granted leave to appeal.
Billable client hours are not working-time records; law firms too must record the start, end and duration of work of employed lawyers.
Working-time recording for employed professionals
- Authority / court
- Hamburger Arbeitsschutzbehörde; bestätigt durch Verwaltungsgericht Hamburg, Kammer 21
- Area of law
- Health and safety and employment law · Working time
- Legal basis
- § 22 Abs. 3 ArbSchG i. V. m. § 3 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 ArbSchG; § 17 Abs. 2 ArbZG; §§ 12, 22 Abs. 1 ArbSchG
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- Published
- 18 Jul 2025
- VG Hamburg, Urteil vom 18.07.2025, 21 K 1202/25 Court decision
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 30 Nov 2025 · Direct link
Report an error
15 Jun 2023 a German football clubCustoms Munich: around €200,000 confiscated from football club over minimum wage €200,000
A football club employed staff in its youth academy from 2016 to 2021 on a €450 mini-job basis although they actually worked far more hours; minimum-wage and record-keeping duties were breached. The Hauptzollamt München (Munich main customs office) issued a confiscation order of around €200,000; in addition, around €45,500 in social security contributions and late-payment surcharges are being reclaimed.
For mini-jobs the hours actually worked count; anyone allowing more hours than agreed must record them and pay the minimum wage for them.
Mini-jobs: actual hours count, not contractual hours
- Authority / court
- Hauptzollamt München
- Area of law
- Health and safety and employment law · Minimum wage and undeclared work
- Legal basis
- Mindestlohngesetz (Mindestlohn, Aufzeichnungspflicht); Einziehungsbescheid
- Action
- Disgorgement of profits
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- Published
- 15 Jun 2023
- Zoll, Presse (Übersicht) (Entscheidung 2023) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 15 Jun 2025 · Direct link
Report an error
27 Apr 2023 a Swiss security technology providerPenalty order: CHF 81m against security technology provider for bribery in South America €82.1m
Because of deficiencies in corporate governance, risk management and compliance, employees of a Swiss security technology provider were able to bribe public officials in connection with business in Brazil, Colombia and Venezuela. The Bundesanwaltschaft (BA, Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland) convicted the company by summary penalty order and imposed a fine of CHF 1,000,000 and a compensatory claim of CHF 80,000,000, CHF 81 million in total. The penalty order against the company is final because the company waived its right to object.
Anyone selling to state bodies in high-risk markets needs effective sales controls, or a large compensatory claim will follow the fine.
Bribery of foreign public officials in sales; compliance organisation
- Authority / court
- Bundesanwaltschaft (BA)
- Area of law
- Bribery and corruption · Bribery of public officials
- Legal basis
- Art. 102 Abs. 2 StGB i.V.m. Art. 322septies StGB; Ersatzforderung nach Art. 71 Abs. 1 StGB
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Other
- Published
- 27 Apr 2023
Original amount 81,000,000 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Apr 2023.
- Bundesanwaltschaft, Medienmitteilungen (Übersicht) (Entscheidung 2023) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 27 Apr 2025 · Direct link
Report an error
12 Apr 2023 a German call centreBNetzA: second €285,000 fine of 2023 on a call centre over energy sales calls €285,000
The Bundesnetzagentur (Federal Network Agency) fined another call centre marketing energy supply 285,000 EUR for unlawful telephone advertising. It is one of the four 2023 energy proceedings in which, according to the agency, callers often concealed the real purpose of the call and asked for meter data.
Call centres need verifiable consent for every number they dial and must honour requests to stop calling immediately.
Consent and proof of consent for telephone marketing
- Authority / court
- Bundesnetzagentur (BNetzA)
- Area of law
- Data protection · Marketing and consent
- Legal basis
- UWG – Verbot unerlaubter Telefonwerbung gegenüber Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- Bundesnetzagentur, Maßnahmen gegen unerlaubte Telefonwerbung mit Archiv-Übersicht der Bußgelder ab 2017 (Übersicht) (Entscheidung 2023) Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Version 2 · Company name anonymised since 12 Apr 2025 · Direct link
Report an error
21 Feb 2023 a German call centreBNetzA: €285,000 fine on call centre over disguised sales calls for energy contracts €285,000
The Bundesnetzagentur (Federal Network Agency) fined a call centre marketing energy supply 285,000 EUR for unlawful telephone advertising. According to the agency's annual review, callers in the 2023 energy cases often posed as the customer's current supplier or as a price comparison site and asked for the meter number or meter reading.
Call centres need verifiable consent for every number they dial and must honour requests to stop calling immediately.
Consent and proof of consent for telephone marketing
- Authority / court
- Bundesnetzagentur (BNetzA)
- Area of law
- Data protection · Marketing and consent
- Legal basis
- UWG – Verbot unerlaubter Telefonwerbung gegenüber Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- Bundesnetzagentur, Maßnahmen gegen unerlaubte Telefonwerbung mit Archiv-Übersicht der Bußgelder ab 2017 (Übersicht) (Entscheidung 2023) Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Version 2 · Company name anonymised since 21 Feb 2025 · Direct link
Report an error
20 Dec 2022 a German call centreBNetzA: €142,000 fine on call centre over unlawful sales calls for telecoms services €142,000
The Bundesnetzagentur (Federal Network Agency) fined a call centre that marketed telecommunications services 142,000 EUR for unlawful telephone advertising. The official list states only the role, the product advertised and the amount.
Call centres need verifiable consent for every number they dial and must honour requests to stop calling immediately.
Consent and proof of consent for telephone marketing
- Authority / court
- Bundesnetzagentur (BNetzA)
- Area of law
- Data protection · Marketing and consent
- Legal basis
- UWG – Verbot unerlaubter Telefonwerbung gegenüber Verbraucherinnen und Verbrauchern
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Other
- Bundesnetzagentur, Maßnahmen gegen unerlaubte Telefonwerbung mit Archiv-Übersicht der Bußgelder ab 2017 (Übersicht) (Entscheidung 2022) Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Version 2 · Company name anonymised since 20 Dec 2024 · Direct link