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 authority- Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS) €1.97m 95 % · 1 case
- Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) €82,141 4 % · 1 case
- Singapore Customs; Verurteilung durch die State Courts €24,218 1 % · 1 case
What for?
by area of lawAll areas of law
Who?
by company- Anonymised companies €2.05m 99 % · 2 cases
- Ayzo Pte Ltd €24,218 1 % · 1 case
When?
per year, by date of decision| Period | Cases | Total |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 1 | €1.97m |
| 2023 | 0 | – |
| 2024 | 1 | €82,141 |
| 2025 | 1 | €24,218 |
| 2026 | 0 | – |
3 cases
30 Jul 2025 Ayzo Pte LtdAyzo: SGD 36,000 fine for freight forwarder misusing other companies' entity identifiers €24,218
In 2024 the freight forwarder Ayzo Pte Ltd misused the Unique Entity Numbers of two other companies in applications for export permits for cigarette shipments to Australia that were described as other goods in the shipping documents, and failed to retain the bills of lading. Ayzo had relied solely on information from an unknown client in India without verifying it with the named importers and exporters. After the company pleaded guilty to ten charges under the Customs Act for incorrect UEN declarations and three charges for failure to retain trade documents, the State Courts imposed a fine of SGD 36,000 on 30 July 2025.
Freight forwarders must verify client and goods information before customs declarations and retain trade documents, or they become tools for smugglers.
Due diligence in customs declarations: verifying clients and goods descriptions
- Authority / court
- Singapore Customs; Verurteilung durch die State Courts
- Area of law
- Sanctions and export control · Customs
- Legal basis
- Customs Act (unrichtige Angabe der Unique Entity Number); drei weitere Anklagepunkte wegen fehlender Aufbewahrung von Handelsdokumenten (Vorschrift in der Mitteilung nicht genannt)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Transport, logistics and shipping
- Published
- 19 Aug 2025
Original amount 36,000 SGD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 Jul 2025.
- Singapore Customs Media Release 19.08.2025: Freight Forwarder Fined $36,000 for Misusing Companies' Unique Entity Identifiers (PDF) Press release of an authority
- Singapore Customs – News (Verzeichnis, Eintrag 19.08.2025 mit Link auf die Mitteilung) Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
14 May 2024 a Singaporean companyCompany: 120,000 SGD over undeleted data on server of a former group company €82,141
During a cloud migration in 2020 and a restructuring in 2022, the company failed to have data on employees, former employees, directors and shareholders deleted from a shared server belonging to the subsidiary; in September 2022 an attacker gained access to that server through the compromised account of one of the former subsidiary's vendors. Numerous individuals were put at risk, and data on some of them – in some cases images of identity documents, signatures, bank accounts and salaries – may have been exfiltrated. The Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC, Singapore's data protection authority) treated the failure to delete for more than two years, without clear instructions to or supervision of staff, as a negligent breach of the Protection Obligation and, in view of the duration, the type of data and deterrence, imposed 120,000 SGD; it accepted a voluntary undertaking from the former subsidiary.
In migrations and restructurings, the deletion of legacy personal data must be expressly instructed, checked and tracked in the data inventory.
Verifiably delete data after migrations and maintain a data inventory
Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.
- Authority / court
- Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC)
- Area of law
- Data protection · Data breaches and data security
- Legal basis
- Section 24 PDPA 2012 (Protection Obligation); Section 48J PDPA (Financial Penalty)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Transport, logistics and shipping
- Culpability
- negligent
- Mitigating circumstances
- Prompt action once alerted to the incident, admission under the Expedited Decision Procedure and cooperation.
- Published
- 2 Aug 2024
Original amount 120,000 SGD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 14 May 2024.
- PDPC, Enforcement Decisions (Übersicht) (Entscheidung 2024) Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 14 May 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
17 Nov 2022 four Singapore warehouse operatorsCCCS: 2.8 million SGD against four warehouse operators for a coordinated FTZ surcharge €1.97m
In 2017 four warehouse operators at a Singapore logistics park coordinated the introduction of an identically named 'FTZ Surcharge' of 6 SGD per freight unit on import cargo instead of setting their prices independently. On 17 November 2022 the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS) imposed penalties totalling 2,799,138 SGD: operator A 1,436,378, operator B 542,520, operator C 522,889 and operator D 297,351 SGD, the latter after a leniency discount. The Competition Appeal Board allowed the appeal of operators C and A on 16 July 2025; on 30 June 2026 the High Court, on the authority's appeal, reinstated the finding that the two had infringed the law, but the authority has not stated whether their penalties again apply in full.
Even telling competitors that you intend to introduce a surcharge can be prohibited price coordination, including for firms with a small market share.
No coordination with competitors on surcharges or pricing intentions
- Authority / court
- Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS)
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- Competition Act 2004, s 34
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Transport, logistics and shipping
- Mitigating circumstances
- Leniency discount for operator D, which applied during the inspections.
- Published
- 17 Nov 2022
Original amount 2,799,138 SGD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 Nov 2022.
Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 17 Nov 2024 · Direct link