Who was sanctioned, and for what?

On board the MSC Samira III, oily bilge water was pumped overboard via the sewage tank, bypassing the oily water separator, in 2024/2025; the oil content monitoring was manipulated and the oil record book, which was presented to the Coast Guard in Philadelphia, was falsified. The operator and the owner each pleaded guilty to two counts under the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships (APPS) and are paying a combined 1.75 million USD; in addition, there are four years of probation.

Authority / court

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Anklage: DOJ Environment and Natural Resources Division)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances

Legal basis

Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships (APPS), 33 U.S.C. § 1908

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Employees

10,000 or more

Culpability

intentional

Published

28 Aug 2026

Original amount 1,750,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 Aug 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link

The Russian cargo airline had been added to the list of the Special Economic Measures (Russia) Regulations in April 2023; the Minister of Foreign Affairs rejected the application for delisting. The Federal Court (2026 FC 1048) dismissed the application for judicial review: the Minister had not exercised her broad discretion unreasonably, and there was no procedural error.

Authority / court

Federal Court (2026 FC 1048); Minister of Foreign Affairs

Area of law

Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes

Legal basis

Special Economic Measures Act; Special Economic Measures (Russia) Regulations, SOR/2014-58, ss. 2(a), 8

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The three sharing providers made it difficult for holders of a Metrebus annual pass to access the free-ride passes promised when the concessions were awarded, through inadequate organisation, cumbersome activation and long waiting times, which shortened the usable time; Bird also deactivated accounts without prior notice. The AGCM imposed fines totalling 2.675 million EUR in three proceedings (Lime 1.4 million, Dott 525,000, Bird 750,000 EUR).

Authority / court

Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Codice del Consumo (pratiche commerciali scorrette), Verfahren PS13028, PS13029, PS13030

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Published

6 Aug 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The car rental company charged customers an "administration fee" of 33.88 to 45 EUR when a rental car incurred a traffic offence – even though naming the driver is a statutory obligation of the rental company. Spain's Ministry of Social Rights, Consumer Affairs and 2030 Agenda classified this as a very serious infringement and imposed the maximum fine of 1 million EUR; a court had already declared the clause void in 2020.

Authority / court

Ministerio de Derechos Sociales, Consumo y Agenda 2030

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Artt. 82, 87.5 y 87.6 TRLGDCU (Real Decreto Legislativo 1/2007)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Repeat case

yes

Published

29 Jul 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

For refunds in the event of delays of 60 minutes or more or cancellations, Trenitalia required prior written confirmation from the call centre or ticket office. The AGCM accepted binding commitments: abolition of the confirmation requirement, strengthened refund channels, an information page on disruptions and an implementation report within three months; no infringement was found.

Authority / court

Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Codice del Consumo (impegni); EU-Fahrgastrechte im Eisenbahnverkehr

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Mitigating circumstances

Binding commitments, no finding of an infringement.

Published

30 Jul 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The Employment Tribunal in Manchester found that the claimant had been subjected to detriment because of a protected disclosure and awarded her the agreed amount of £6,978.20. The claims for disability discrimination and constructive dismissal were dismissed.

Authority / court

Employment Tribunal

Area of law

Whistleblower protection · Retaliation against whistleblowers

Legal basis

Employment Rights Act 1996, s. 47B (Benachteiligung wegen geschützter Offenlegung)

Action

Other

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

7 Sep 2026

Original amount 6,978.2 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Jul 2026.

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

The data protection authority had prohibited a company from tracking its three company vehicles continuously by GPS and ordered the data to be erased; narrow purposes such as theft protection while parked remained permitted. The Upravno sodišče Republike Slovenije (Administrative Court of the Republic of Slovenia) upheld this and clarified that employee consent bundled with other declarations is invalid.

Authority / court

Upravno sodišče Republike Slovenije (bekanntgemacht durch den Informacijski pooblaščenec)

Area of law

Data protection · Employee data

Legal basis

Art. 6 Abs. 1 lit. f, Art. 7 Abs. 2 DSGVO

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Published

7 Jul 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Following an investigation by the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA), the Traffic Commissioner (regulator of commercial vehicle operators) found that the sole director of TMA Haulage Ltd had driven using the driver card of a former employee, thereby falsifying the records, three times in June and July 2025 and – after being interviewed by the DVSA – twice in April 2026; on one of those days he continued driving in this way without taking the break that was due. The operator's licence was curtailed immediately from five to four vehicles and revoked with effect from 6 October 2026. Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Authority / court

Traffic Commissioner (Western Traffic Area); Ermittlung: Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA)

Area of law

Health and safety and employment law · Working time

Legal basis

Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995, ss. 26(1)(f), 27(1)(a) und (b); Road Traffic Act 1988, ss. 115, 117; Tachografen- und Lenkzeitvorschriften

Action

Other

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Culpability

intentional

Mitigating circumstances

According to the decision, points in the company's favour were: most compliance systems in place, drivers properly employed, an MOT pass rate in line with the national average, and the re-engagement of a consultant and legal representation.

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

22 Jul 2026

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The Sanctions Committee of the FSMA (Belgian Financial Services and Markets Authority) found that the shipping company Exmar NV, listed on Euronext Brussels, had not disclosed as soon as possible inside information it held on 19 May and 18 June 2020; the information related to a customer's missing payments for the charter of a floating LNG facility. It imposed a fine of 350,000 EUR and ordered publication by name for one year. Exmar has lodged an appeal with the Market Court.

Authority / court

Autoriteit voor Financiële Diensten en Markten / Autorité des services et marchés financiers (FSMA) – Sanctiecommissie

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Art. 17 Verordnung (EU) Nr. 596/2014 (MAR); Art. 36 § 2 und Art. 72 § 3 Gesetz vom 2. August 2002 über die Aufsicht über den Finanzsektor

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

At the Port of Aberdeen, an employee loosening a lorry curtain was struck by a reversing forklift truck and suffered multiple fractures and a degloving injury. Pedestrians and vehicles were not separated during simultaneous loading and unloading. Fine of £146,700. According to the annual accounts filed with the UK companies register for financial year 2025, the company had around 236 employees.

Authority / court

Aberdeen Sheriff Court (Ermittlung: Health and Safety Executive)

Area of law

Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents

Legal basis

Regulation 17(1) Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992; Section 33(1)(c) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Employees

50 to 249

Published

28 May 2026

Original amount 146,700 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 May 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link

The tanker M/T Sarah Desgagnés, operated by the company, entered the Akpait National Wildlife Area in Nunavut on 29 September and 6 October 2024 without the required access permit. The Nunavut Court of Justice imposed 40,000 CAD for the Environmental Damages Fund; the company must publish a notice in a local newspaper and is listed in the Environmental Offenders Registry.

Authority / court

Nunavut Court of Justice (Ermittlungen: Environment and Climate Change Canada)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability

Legal basis

Wildlife Area Regulations (Canada Wildlife Act), Paragraph 3.3(1)(h)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Published

8 May 2026

Original amount 40,000 CAD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 8 May 2026.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

A processor of Berlin's public transport operator BVG, which had sent customer letters in early 2025, was hacked; around 180,000 customer records were affected, although they should long since have been deleted after the end of the contract. BVG had never checked the deletion, had not agreed any procedure for data breaches in the data processing agreement and reported the incident only after the 72-hour deadline had expired; the Berlin Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information (BlnBDI) issued a reprimand.

Authority / court

Berliner Beauftragte für Datenschutz und Informationsfreiheit (BlnBDI)

Area of law

Data protection · Data processors

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 2 i. V. m. Abs. 1 lit. c, e, f, Art. 28 Abs. 3 S. 2 lit. f, Art. 32 Abs. 1, Art. 33 DSGVO

Action

Reprimand or warning

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Mitigating circumstances

BVG has announced measures against similar incidents.

Published

4 May 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

In 2023 PostNL delivered only 89.48% of letters with a five-day delivery obligation under the universal postal service on time, instead of the statutory 95%. The ACM (Autoriteit Consument & Markt, Dutch competition and consumer authority) rejected the force majeure argument based on the tight labour market and imposed a fine of 6,923,000 EUR.

Authority / court

Autoriteit Consument & Markt (ACM)

Area of law

Other

Legal basis

Art. 16 Abs. 6 Postwet 2009 i. V. m. Art. 4a Postbesluit 2009

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Published

12 May 2026

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Amsterdam-based Ridetech offered the ride-hailing app Yango in Finland and Norway and transferred data of drivers and customers to the group companies Yandex.Taxi LLC and Yandex LLC in Russia without demonstrating appropriate safeguards. The Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens (Dutch Data Protection Authority, AP) imposed 100 million EUR on the legal successor and prohibited further transfers to Russia.

Authority / court

Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens (AP)

Area of law

Data protection · International data transfers

Legal basis

Art. 44, Art. 46 iVm Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. a und Abs. 2 DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

In February 2023 there was external, unauthorised access to a system operated by a processor containing data on users and employees. As lead authority, the AEPD imposed 650,000 EUR for breaching Art. 5(1)(f) GDPR, dropped the charges under Art. 32 and 34 and ordered appropriate security measures within six months. The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

Authority / court

Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. f DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

In 2021 the courier company concluded an agreement with a competitor acting as reseller that allocated customers and fixed prices, and gave effect to the non-compete clause on one occasion; the wording had been copied from an older Fastway template. In civil proceedings brought by the Commerce Commission (ComCom, New Zealand's competition authority), the High Court on 4 March 2026 approved the jointly proposed penalty, allegedly of 700,000 NZD (starting point 1 million NZD, 30% reduction).

Authority / court

High Court Auckland (Klage: Commerce Commission)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Commerce Act 1986, s 30

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Culpability

negligent

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

No previous warnings or contraventions, voluntary provision of documents and interviews, early admission and remorse, new agreements without the clause and a new competition law compliance programme in New Zealand and Australia.

Liability of senior managers

The agreement was prepared from a template by the national sales manager; a more senior employee signed it without reviewing its content.

Published

4 Mar 2026

Original amount 700,000 NZD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 4 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

During an inspection at the Passo Corese logistics centre (around 1,800 employees), the Garante (Italian data protection authority) found that, after return-to-work interviews, information on illnesses, participation in strikes, trade union activities and family circumstances of employees – irrelevant to their professional aptitude – was recorded in free-text fields of a platform linked to time recording and accessible to many managers. With immediate effect it ordered the definitive restriction of processing of these entries – also at all other sites using the platform – and of four cameras at the entrances to toilets and break areas; the investigation was continuing.

Authority / court

Garante per la protezione dei dati personali

Area of law

Data protection · Employee data

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. a, c und e, Art. 6, 9 und 88 DSGVO; Art. 113 Codice privacy (D.Lgs. 196/2003); Maßnahme nach Art. 58 Abs. 2 lit. f DSGVO

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

24 Feb 2026

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

The UODO (Urząd Ochrony Danych Osobowych, Polish data protection authority) fined the parcel carrier DPD Polska sp. z o.o. a total of PLN 11,461,030. PLN 6,251,471 relates to the company using external hauliers for shipments between its depots without a data processing agreement under Art. 28(3) GDPR, although they had access to the address labels during loading and unloading; PLN 5,209,559 relates to staff not being given effective authorisations to process data and the company's own data protection policy not being implemented (Art. 24, 29, 32 GDPR). The authority classed both infringements as intentional and treated earlier reprimands against the company as aggravating. The decision is not final.

Authority / court

Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Danych Osobowych (UODO)

Area of law

Data protection · Data processors

Legal basis

Art. 28 Abs. 3 i. V. m. Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. a und Abs. 2 DSGVO; Art. 24 Abs. 1 und 2, Art. 29, Art. 32 Abs. 1 und 4 i. V. m. Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. f und Abs. 2 DSGVO; Art. 83 Abs. 4 lit. a und Abs. 5 lit. a DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Culpability

intentional

Repeat case

yes

Mitigating circumstances

It was treated as mitigating that, after the proceedings were opened, DPD amended its contracts with the hauliers to include data processing terms and changed its procedure for granting authorisations.

Liability of senior managers

No personal liability was established.

Published

23 Feb 2026

Original amount 11,461,030 PLN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 5 Feb 2026.

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

Between June and December 2023, a logistics and transport business withheld a total of around 2,000 EUR in minimum wages from several employees, breached reporting and immediate notification obligations, and in July/August 2023 employed a foreign national without a residence permit. The fines: 5,231 EUR (minimum wage), 750 EUR each (reporting obligations) and 7,000 EUR (unauthorised employment of foreign nationals), totalling 13,731 EUR (date = publication).

Authority / court

Hauptzollamt Karlsruhe (Finanzkontrolle Schwarzarbeit)

Area of law

Health and safety and employment law · Minimum wage and undeclared work

Legal basis

§ 21 Abs. 1 Nr. 11 MiLoG; § 111 Abs. 1 Nr. 2 SGB IV; § 404 Abs. 2 Nr. 3 SGB III

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Published

22 Jan 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The function of data protection officer was performed by a manager who was at the same time responsible for security and protection of classified information and thus monitored their own activities; there was no conflict analysis. Poland’s data protection authority (UODO) imposed 978,128 PLN and referred to numerous previous reprimands and orders against the company.

Authority / court

Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Danych Osobowych (UODO)

Area of law

Data protection

Legal basis

Art. 38 Abs. 3 und 6 DSGVO (DKN.5131.4.2025)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Employees

10,000 or more

Repeat case

yes

Mitigating circumstances

During the proceedings the function was made independent and placed directly under the management board.

Published

26 Jan 2026

Original amount 978,128 PLN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 2 Jan 2026.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

From April 2023 until at least April 2025, Ryanair obstructed travel agencies from buying Ryanair flights in combination with other services, for example through facial recognition procedures, account deletions, blocking of means of payment and restrictive partner agreements. The AGCM considered this to be an abuse of a dominant position and imposed fines of 255,761,692 EUR on a joint and several basis.

Authority / court

Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)

Area of law

Competition law · Abuse of market power

Legal basis

Art. 102 AEUV

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

23 Dec 2025

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

In 2023, the French data protection authority (CNIL) had imposed 32 million EUR for the real-time monitoring of warehouse staff through scanner metrics. France's supreme administrative court (Conseil d'État) held that three metrics (‘Stow Machine Gun’, ‘Idle Time’, ‘Latency’) were covered by legitimate interest, but upheld the findings on the 31-day retention of all metrics, information deficiencies and security flaws in the video surveillance, and reduced the fine to 15 million EUR.

Authority / court

Conseil d'État

Area of law

Data protection · Employee data

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. c, Art. 12, 13, 32 DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

reduced

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Employees

10,000 or more

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

For years the cameras at stations and stops of the Budapest suburban railway HÉV also recorded sound; the NAIH (Nemzeti Adatvédelmi és Információszabadság Hatóság, Hungarian data protection authority) found breaches of transparency, data minimisation, lawfulness, storage limitation and the duty to carry out a data protection impact assessment. It imposed HUF 50,000,000 on the operator's legal successor and at the same time warned it against future audio recording without demonstrated necessity.

Authority / court

Nemzeti Adatvédelmi és Információszabadság Hatóság (NAIH)

Area of law

Data protection · Video surveillance

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. a, c, e, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 12 Abs. 1, Art. 13 Abs. 1 lit. e, Art. 35 Abs. 1 DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Culpability

negligent

Published

19 Dec 2025

Original amount 50,000,000 HUF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 19 Dec 2025.

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

Euro Car Parks left a formal CMA information notice served in July 2025 unanswered for around three months despite repeated attempts at contact, later saying it had blocked the authority's emails as suspected fraud. The CMA did not accept this as a reasonable excuse and, in its first penalty under the new DMCCA powers, imposed a fixed penalty of GBP 473,000; the company has appealed to the High Court, and no breach of consumer law has been found. The decision is not final.

Authority / court

Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail

Legal basis

Schedule 5 paragraph 16C(2) Consumer Rights Act 2015 (geändert durch den Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Published

13 Feb 2026

Original amount 473,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Dec 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Following client complaints, the FSCA found that the company and its predecessor South African Relocations had issued marine (transit) insurance policies to the public without authorisation, thereby acting as unlicensed insurers. The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

Authority / court

Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Short-term Insurance Act, s. 7(1); Insurance Act, s. 5(1); Financial Sector Regulation Act 9 of 2017, s. 139

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

9 Dec 2025

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

On appeal by the Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband (Federation of German Consumer Organisations), the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf (Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court) prohibited Eurowings from advertising a €9 CO2 offset during online booking in a way that makes customers believe they travel climate-neutrally; it was not mentioned that other climate-damaging emissions are not offset. By contrast, the court did not consider the 'Sustainable Aviation Fuel' advertising misleading; it did not grant leave to appeal on points of law.

Authority / court

Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf, 20. Zivilsenat

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Misleading environmental and sustainability claims

Legal basis

UWG (irreführende Werbung); Az. I-20 U 38/25

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Published

5 Dec 2025

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

On 2 December 2025 the ICO issued a reprimand to Post Office Limited. The ICO found that on 25 April 2024 the company put the unredacted version of a settlement deed on its corporate website instead of the intended redacted one, exposing personal data of 502 postmasters who had taken part in the 2017 group litigation linked to the Horizon IT scandal. The ICO concluded that appropriate technical and organisational measures were lacking, in breach of Articles 5(1)(f), 32(1) and 32(2) UK GDPR. No fine was imposed.

Authority / court

Information Commissioner's Office (ICO)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Art. 5(1)(f), 32(1) und 32(2) UK GDPR; Art. 58(2)(b) UK GDPR

Action

Reprimand or warning

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

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

Following several complaints, the Datu valsts inspekcija (Latvian Data State Inspectorate, DVI) examined how the parking operator collects contractual penalties: invoices were sent to previous rather than current registered addresses, claims were handed over to debt collection services and entered in the database of Kredītinformācijas Birojs. The authority found breaches of the principles of lawfulness, data minimisation and confidentiality and of the accountability obligation and imposed 25,000 EUR (previous year’s turnover according to the decision: 8,323,178 EUR).

Authority / court

Datu valsts inspekcija (DVI)

Area of law

Data protection

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. a, c, f und Abs. 2, Art. 83 Abs. 5 lit. a DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Culpability

intentional

Mitigating circumstances

Practice changed after the proceedings began; contracts concluded with the population and vehicle registers (PMLP, CSDD)

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The Naturvårdsverket (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency) imposed a penalty of 142,757,565 SEK on the airline Braathens International Airways because it had not surrendered emission allowances for 99,707 tonnes of CO2 equivalent from 2024 by the deadline of 30 September 2025. The inflation-adjusted penalty amounts to 129.69 EUR per tonne (12,930,939 EUR) and does not release the company from the obligation to surrender allowances; the company had been declared bankrupt on 30 September 2025. A separate penalty was imposed on its sister company Braathens Regional Airways AB.

Authority / court

Naturvårdsverket

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits

Legal basis

10 kap. 5 § förordningen (2020:1180) om vissa utsläpp av växthusgaser; 16 § 3 lagen om vissa utsläpp av växthusgaser; Art. 12 Abs. 3 Richtlinie 2003/87/EG (EU-Emissionshandel)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Mitigating circumstances

None: EU rules allow no exception from the surrender obligation regardless of the company's financial situation.

Published

10 Nov 2025

Original amount 142,757,565 SEK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 6 Nov 2025.

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

The airport operator AENA used a biometric facial recognition system for access, transit and boarding at several airports without presenting a data protection impact assessment meeting the legal requirements. The AEPD imposed 10,043,002 EUR for breaching Art. 35 GDPR and confirmed the provisional suspension of all biometric processing until a proper impact assessment is in place.

Authority / court

Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD)

Area of law

Data protection

Legal basis

Art. 35 DSGVO (Art. 83 Abs. 4 lit. a DSGVO)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Employees

1,000 to 9,999

Published

20 Mar 2026

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

In 2023 an employee climbed up the side of a sugar beet conveyor to clear a blockage by hand, fell and suffered broken ribs, a lung injury and liver damage. Blockages occurred several times per shift, and there was no safe system for clearing them; fine of 133,000 GBP plus 5,438 GBP in costs. According to its 2024 annual accounts, the company employed an average of 535 people.

Authority / court

Peterborough Magistrates' Court (Anklage: Health and Safety Executive)

Area of law

Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents

Legal basis

Section 2(1) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Employees

250 to 999

Published

30 Oct 2025

Original amount 133,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 24 Oct 2025.

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

The warehousing and logistics company Onkar Group Pty Ltd (Bakeology) was sentenced by the County Court in Wangaratta after guilty pleas to five charges, after a delivery driver died in August 2022 when, twelve hours after starting a night shift, his van ended up in front of an oncoming lorry. He had driven the same 796-kilometre route on 17 nights in a row, mostly in shifts of more than twelve hours without sufficient rest. The company received 1.1 million AUD for reckless endangerment and a total of 250,000 AUD for failing to provide safe working conditions; in addition, the offence must be publicised in an industry publication. Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Authority / court

WorkSafe Victoria

Area of law

Health and safety and employment law · Working time

Legal basis

Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 (Vic): rücksichtslose Gefährdung, Pflicht zu sicherem Arbeitsplatz, Schutz von Nicht-Beschäftigten, Haftung als Organ (officer)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Mitigating circumstances

Guilty pleas.

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

22 Sep 2025

Original amount 1,350,000 AUD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Sep 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

In May 2022, bypassing internal compliance procedures, the Houston freight forwarder engaged a blocked Venezuelan state-owned airline for a shipment from Mexico to Argentina; the aircraft used, which was also blocked, was operated by Iran's Mahan Air. The US Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) classified the case as egregious and not voluntarily self-disclosed, partly because two vice presidents bypassed the screening under time pressure.

Authority / court

U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)

Area of law

Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes

Legal basis

Venezuela-, Iran-, Proliferations- und Terrorismus-Sanktionsprogramme (OFAC); IEEPA

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Culpability

negligent

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

No prior violations in five years, immediate remediation, substantial cooperation

Liability of senior managers

According to OFAC, the violation was driven primarily by two vice presidents who bypassed internal screening processes.

Published

3 Sep 2025

Original amount 1,610,775 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 3 Sep 2025.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Between 1 January 2022 and 22 March 2024 the airline gave passengers false information in individual replies, automated emails and on its website about their compensation rights under the Civil Aviation Act for delays and cancellations within its control, so that valid claims were refused. After pleading guilty to 20 representative charges, it was fined 2,250,000 NZD. The Commerce Commission (ComCom, New Zealand's competition and consumer authority) had already issued Jetstar with compliance advice for similar statements before the offending period.

Authority / court

Strafgericht, in der Quelle nicht benannt (Anklage: Commerce Commission)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail

Legal basis

Fair Trading Act 1986, s 13(i)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Mitigating circumstances

Following the Commerce Commission's intervention, Jetstar compensated 2,692 affected customers with a total of 1,039,390 NZD.

Published

1 Sep 2025

Original amount 2,250,000 NZD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 1 Sep 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

On board the tanker M/T Swift Winchester, a hose connected the incinerator's waste oil tank to the sewage tank from February to August 2022, so that oily waste bypassed the pollution prevention equipment and went into the sea; in August 2022, an oily water separator filter was also hosed down with degreaser on deck and the oily mixture ran overboard. The vessel called at Baton Rouge and Port Arthur with a knowingly falsified oil record book. The ship management company pleaded guilty and is paying a fine of 2 million USD.

Authority / court

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Anklage: DOJ Environment and Natural Resources Division)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances

Legal basis

Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships (APPS)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Culpability

intentional

Published

27 Aug 2025

Original amount 2,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Aug 2025.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

GXO had already acquired Wincanton in April 2024; the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) imposed a hold-separate order, appointed a monitoring trustee and, in Phase 2, found a lessening of competition in dedicated warehousing services for grocery retail. Under the final undertakings, GXO committed to divest Wincanton’s business serving supermarket customers.

Authority / court

Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)

Area of law

Competition law · Merger control

Legal basis

Enterprise Act 2002, ss. 41, 82, 90 (Final Undertakings)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

On 22 February 2018 the then start-up airline told the Canada Transportation Agency that, after a letter of intent for two leased aircraft had been terminated, the start of flight operations would slip to the end of 2018, but it did not publish this material change until 13 March 2018. In its settlement with the BCSC the company admitted breaching the duty of immediate disclosure and pays CAD 100,000 as a joint payment. Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Authority / court

British Columbia Securities Commission (BCSC), Executive Director (Vergleich)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Securities Act (British Columbia), RSBC 1996, c. 418, s. 85 (unverzügliche Offenlegung wesentlicher Änderungen) und s. 168.2(1)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

22 Aug 2025

Original amount 100,000 CAD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Aug 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Acting as a waste broker, the Sheffield company arranged in 2019/2020 for more than 1,400 tonnes of waste to be transported to an illegally operated site in Lincolnshire without continuously checking the operator's authorisations. The court imposed a fine of 80,000 GBP and a confiscation order of 37,587.13 GBP (117,587.13 GBP in total) plus 50,000 GBP in costs. According to its 2024 annual accounts, the company had an average of 104 employees.

Authority / court

Nottingham Crown Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances

Legal basis

Section 34(1)(a) und 34(6) Environmental Protection Act 1990 (Duty of Care)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Employees

50 to 249

Culpability

negligent

Mitigating circumstances

The court accepted that the company did not know the site was operating illegally; first prosecution in over 40 years, new management team

Published

13 Aug 2025

Original amount 117,587.13 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 8 Aug 2025.

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

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.

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.

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Derby Crown Court imposed three fines of £297,500 each (£892,500 in total) and £65,687.54 in costs on the operator of East Midlands Airport. In January and February 2022, surface water drainage containing residues of aircraft and runway de-icing fluid exceeded the permitted BOD limit of 15 mg/l on three occasions. The court heard that there had already been 13 permit breaches and ten written warnings since 2006.

Authority / court

Derby Crown Court (Anklage: Environment Agency)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits

Legal basis

Reg. 38(2) Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Repeat case

yes

Mitigating circumstances

Change of management in 2022 and active engagement with the Environment Agency (as put forward by the company).

Published

28 Jul 2025

Original amount 892,500 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 Jul 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

After the acquisition of a Colombian logistics company in December 2021, the latter organised 36 freight shipments to Cuba worth around 3.06 million USD up to July 2023. Neither the US parent nor the subsidiary had a sanctions compliance programme for foreign companies; the US Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) assessed the case as non-egregious and voluntarily self-disclosed.

Authority / court

U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)

Area of law

Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes

Legal basis

Cuban Assets Control Regulations (31 C.F.R. part 515)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Culpability

negligent

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

Voluntary self-disclosure, no prior violations, remedial measures after discovery

Published

2 Jul 2025

Original amount 608,825 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 2 Jul 2025.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The Sø- og Handelsretten (Danish Maritime and Commercial High Court) ordered A.P. Møller-Mærsk A/S to pay a civil fine of 10,000,000 DKK because the acquisition of Pilot Air Freight Holdings by its US subsidiary Damco USA in May 2022 had neither been notified in Denmark nor cleared before completion. The authority had sought at least 20 million DKK; the court found the failure grossly negligent but reduced the fine because of the self-report, full cooperation and an existing compliance programme.

Authority / court

Sø- og Handelsretten (Klage der Konkurrence- og Forbrugerstyrelsen)

Area of law

Competition law · Merger control

Legal basis

Konkurrenceloven § 12 b stk. 1 og § 12 c stk. 5, 1. pkt.; Bußgeldbemessung nach § 23 b

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Employees

10,000 or more

Culpability

negligent

Mitigating circumstances

Prompt notification to the authority once the filing obligation was discovered, full and loyal cooperation, an existing competition compliance programme that was followed; a one-off internal screening error.

Published

27 Jun 2025

Original amount 10,000,000 DKK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Jun 2025.

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

The shipping company processed results of on-board breath alcohol tests that could be attributed to a complainant employed as a captain. The Swedish Authority for Privacy Protection (IMY) regarded this as processing without a legal basis and as unlawful processing of health data and imposed 75,000 SEK.

Authority / court

Integritetsskyddsmyndigheten (IMY)

Area of law

Data protection · Employee data

Legal basis

DSGVO Art. 6, Art. 9

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Published

18 Jun 2025

Original amount 75,000 SEK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 18 Jun 2025.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

In the view of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the freight railway operated locomotives without a certificate of conformity, did not comply with the conditions of a testing exemption for several locomotives and operated locomotives in breach of the applicable emission standards. Under the settlement (Consent Agreement and Final Order), the company is paying a civil penalty of 299,000 USD.

Authority / court

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 3

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits

Legal basis

Clean Air Act §§ 203(a), 213(d) (42 U.S.C. §§ 7522(a), 7547(d)); 40 C.F.R. § 1068.101

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Employees

10,000 or more

Original amount 299,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 14 May 2025.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The Østre Landsret (Eastern High Court) raised the fine of 100,000 DKK imposed by the Frederiksberg City Court in January 2023 to 250,000 DKK. The taxi company had kept customers' telephone numbers together with pick-up locations for five years instead of the necessary two; the Datatilsynet (Danish Data Protection Agency) had proposed 1.2 million DKK in its first GDPR fine recommendation and cited around 8.9 million affected trips. The court found the infringement negligent and reduced the amount because the proceedings had lasted about six years.

Authority / court

Østre Landsret (auf Anzeige der Datatilsynet)

Area of law

Data protection

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. e, Art. 83 Abs. 5 lit. a DSGVO; databeskyttelseslovens § 41 stk. 1 nr. 4, stk. 3 og 6

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Culpability

negligent

Mitigating circumstances

Negligence, first offence, no particularly sensitive data, secure storage, prompt remediation after the report; long duration of the proceedings.

Original amount 250,000 DKK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 Apr 2025.

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

In the context of investigations into dealings with a Sovcomflot subsidiary, the fuel shipping company registered in the UK and operating from Cyprus did not respond in time to a formal information request from HM Treasury's Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI); a response only came after contact via its auditors. No sanctions breach as such was found, but the information offence was.

Authority / court

HM Treasury, Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI)

Area of law

Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes

Legal basis

Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, regs. 72, 74(1)(a)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Culpability

negligent

Mitigating circumstances

Minor, indirect harm; the response was provided subsequently

Published

8 May 2025

Original amount 5,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 11 Apr 2025.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Following a complaint from a client, the authority found that the company had provided financial services without FSP authorisation and had issued short-term non-life insurance policies to private individuals without an insurance licence. The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

Authority / court

Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision

Legal basis

Sections 7(1) und 8(9)(c) Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act 37 of 2002; Sections 7(1) und 8(2)(d) Short-term Insurance Act 53 of 1998; Section 5(1) Insurance Act 18 of 2017

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

6 Feb 2025

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

FinCEN imposed a civil money penalty of USD 37 million on Brink’s Global Services USA, Inc. From October 2018 to October 2020 the company transported cash from Mexico to third parties in the United States and Spain, thereby acting as a money services business (MSB), without registering with FinCEN, setting up an AML programme or filing suspicious activity reports; the shipments were equivalent to around USD 800 million. USD 20 million that Brink’s pays to the DOJ under a non-prosecution agreement is credited against the penalty; USD 17 million is payable to FinCEN. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

Authority / court

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), U.S. Department of the Treasury

Area of law

Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls

Legal basis

31 U.S.C. § 5330 und § 5318(h)(1), (g); 31 C.F.R. §§ 1022.380, 1022.210 sowie Pflicht zu Verdachtsmeldungen nach 31 C.F.R. Part 1022

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Mitigating circumstances

FinCEN took into account that the company cooperated with the authority and agreed to toll the statute of limitations.

Published

6 Feb 2025

Original amount 37,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 31 Jan 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The AGCM (Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato, Italian competition and consumer authority) fined General Logistics Systems B.V., General Logistics Systems Italy S.p.A. and General Logistics Systems Enterprise S.r.l. EUR 8,000,000 jointly and severally because the “Climate Protect” environmental programme was promoted with vague, unsubstantiated environmental claims and misleading certificates of offset CO2 emissions. Subscription customers, including micro-enterprises, also had to pay an unrequested climate contribution that clearly exceeded the programme's costs, while large customers were exempted. The authority classified this as an unfair commercial practice under Art. 20, 21, 22 and 26(f) of the Codice del consumo (Italian Consumer Code) and prohibited its continuation.

Authority / court

Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Misleading environmental and sustainability claims

Legal basis

Art. 20, 21, 22 und 26 lit. f Codice del consumo (D.Lgs. 206/2005); Sanktion nach Art. 27 Abs. 9 Codice del consumo

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Published

4 Feb 2025

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

According to the SEC's findings, AAR paid sham commissions to public officials through intermediaries (a sales agent and a joint venture partner) in order to secure the sale of two Airbus A330s to Nepal Airlines and maintenance services for South African Airways Technical. SEC: 23,451,100 USD in disgorgement and 5,785,524 USD in interest; DOJ criminal penalty of 26,363,029 USD under a Non-Prosecution Agreement.

Authority / court

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC); U.S. Department of Justice

Area of law

Bribery and corruption · Bribery of public officials

Legal basis

FCPA (Anti-Bestechung, Buchführung, interne Kontrollen); Non-Prosecution Agreement

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Employees

1,000 to 9,999

Culpability

intentional

Mitigating circumstances

Disclosure following press reports, cooperation (forensics, translations, witnesses) and remedial measures.

Published

19 Dec 2024

Original amount 55,599,653 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 19 Dec 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Direct link

According to the KFTC (Korea Fair Trade Commission, Korea's competition authority), Kakao Mobility, dominant in app-based general taxi hailing with a 96% share (2022), required four competing franchise taxi operators (UT, TADA, Banban, Macaron Taxi) to sign partnership agreements granting real-time access to business-sensitive data and otherwise excluded their drivers from general hailing via Kakao T. Following its plenary deliberation on 25 September 2024, the KFTC ordered remedies and announced a provisional fine of KRW 72.4 billion; after the Securities and Futures Commission had determined that revenue must be recognised on a net basis, it announced on 17 December 2024 that the fine had been finally set at KRW 15.1 billion.

Authority / court

Korea Fair Trade Commission (KFTC)

Area of law

Competition law · Abuse of market power

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 1 Nr. 3 und Art. 45 Abs. 1 Nr. 6 MRFTA (Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Published

17 Dec 2024

Original amount 15,100,000,000 KRW, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 Dec 2024.

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

From November 2018 to February 2022, five foreign subsidiaries of the logistics group acquired through takeovers brokered or transported a total of 82 shipments involving Iranian or Cuban goods or an Iranian airline. The main cause was that their booking systems had not yet been integrated into the group's screening processes; the US Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) considered the case non-egregious and voluntarily self-disclosed.

Authority / court

U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)

Area of law

Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes

Legal basis

Iranian Transactions and Sanctions Regulations; Cuban Assets Control Regulations

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Employees

10,000 or more

Culpability

negligent

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

Voluntary self-disclosure, no prior violations, swift remediation

Published

13 Dec 2024

Original amount 257,690 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 13 Dec 2024.

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

Between 2015 and 2019, Air Caraïbes and Air Antilles (Compagnie Aérienne Inter Régionale Express, CAIRE), with the involvement of Miles Plus (Aérogestion), coordinated in four agreements on capacity cuts, the allocation of flight slots and prices and fare conditions on inter-island routes in the Caribbean. The Autorité de la concurrence (French Competition Authority) imposed EUR 13 million jointly on Air Caraïbes, Groupe Dubreuil Aéro and Groupe Dubreuil, EUR 1.5 million on K Finance as parent company of the insolvent CAIRE, and EUR 70,000 on Miles Plus.

Authority / court

Autorité de la concurrence

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Art. L. 420-1 Code de commerce; Art. 101 Abs. 1 AEUV

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Mitigating circumstances

Settlement procedure for the Groupe Dubreuil companies and Miles Plus; no fine was imposed on CAIRE, which is in liquidation, or on its direct parent company owing to inability to pay.

Published

4 Dec 2024

Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

The Spanish Ministry of Consumer Affairs imposed a fine of 107,775,777 EUR on Ryanair, including for charging for cabin baggage, surcharges for adjacent seats for children and persons requiring assistance, refusing cash payments at airports, a fee for printing boarding passes that the ministry considered excessive, and non-transparent price information. The fine was part of a package of sanctions totalling 179 million EUR against five low-cost airlines. Ryanair has challenged it before the High Court of Justice of Madrid (Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Madrid), which suspended enforcement in June 2025 subject to a guarantee; the decision is not final.

Authority / court

Ministerio de Derechos Sociales, Consumo y Agenda 2030

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 47 TRLGDCU (Real Decreto Legislativo 1/2007), infracciones muy graves

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

22 Nov 2024

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link

UPS based the valuation of UPS Freight on a consultant's appraisal of around 2 billion USD, although its own analyses had arrived at only about 650 million USD, and did not record a required goodwill impairment. UPS is paying 45 million USD and must introduce training for certain executives, board members and employees and engage an independent compliance consultant.

Authority / court

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Section 17(a)(2),(3) Securities Act; Reporting-, Buchführungs-, interne Kontroll- und Disclosure-Controls-Vorschriften des Exchange Act

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Original amount 45,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Nov 2024.

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

In the same package of sanctions against low-cost airlines, Vueling received a fine of 39,264,412 EUR, including for fees for cabin baggage, surcharges for seats next to accompanied children and what the ministry considered misleading omissions in the presentation of prices on its website. The decision could be challenged in court; whether it is final has not been confirmed.

Authority / court

Ministerio de Derechos Sociales, Consumo y Agenda 2030

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 47 TRLGDCU (Real Decreto Legislativo 1/2007), infracciones muy graves

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Published

22 Nov 2024

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link

The delivery platform unlawfully processed data on more than 35,000 riders: facial recognition for identity verification, location tracking even outside working hours and automated assessments without human review. Foodinho had already been sanctioned with 2.6 million EUR in 2021; in addition to 5 million EUR, the Italian data protection authority (Garante per la protezione dei dati personali) prohibited the biometric processing.

Authority / court

Garante per la protezione dei dati personali

Area of law

Data protection · Employee data

Legal basis

DSGVO (u. a. Transparenz, biometrische Daten, automatisierte Entscheidungen)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Repeat case

yes

Published

22 Nov 2024

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

Customers who ordered, for example, mail forwarding automatically received an electronic OmaPosti mailbox that could not be deselected separately; they were also informed insufficiently and in part incorrectly about the activation. The sanctions board of the Tietosuojavaltuutetun toimisto (Office of the Data Protection Ombudsman) found no contractual legal basis for this bundling and imposed 2.4 million EUR together with a reprimand and an order to rectify the situation. On 3 November 2025 the Helsinki Administrative Court upheld the reprimand and the order on account of the insufficient information but annulled the fine, as it considered the processing necessary for the contract on Posti’s electronic services.

Authority / court

Tietosuojavaltuutetun toimisto – seuraamuskollegio (Datenschutzbeauftragter, Sanktionsgremium)

Area of law

Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency

Legal basis

DSGVO Art. 6 Abs. 1 lit. b, Art. 13, Art. 25

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

overturned

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Published

15 Nov 2024

Amount in EUR; no ECB reference rate is available for this currency.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link

According to the European Commission's findings, the Czech and Austrian rail incumbents coordinated from 2012 to 2016 on sales of used ÖBB long-distance carriages so that the new entrant RegioJet could not buy them, including through coordinated timing, rigged sales procedures and exchanges of confidential bidder information. The fines amount to 31,940,000 EUR for ČD and 16,712,000 EUR for ÖBB, which received a 45% reduction as leniency applicant (48,652,000 EUR in total).

Authority / court

Europäische Kommission

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Art. 101 AEUV

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Mitigating circumstances

ÖBB: 45% reduction under the leniency programme.

Published

23 Oct 2024

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

The Kartellgericht (Cartel Court) fined an Austrian postal operator 9.2 million EUR for abusing its dominant position in addressed bulk mail from 2017 to early 2022: consolidators received worse discount scales, discounts or annual bonuses than other large customers for the same annual volume, and the discounts agreed with large customers were subject to a confidentiality obligation. The fine followed an already final cease-and-desist order obtained by a consolidator; the company acknowledged the infringement in a settlement.

Authority / court

Oberlandesgericht Wien als Kartellgericht (Antrag der Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde)

Area of law

Competition law · Abuse of market power

Legal basis

§ 5 KartG und Art. 102 AEUV; § 29 Abs. 1 Z 1 lit. a und d KartG

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Employees

10,000 or more

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

Reduction for the consensual termination of the proceedings (settlement); damage already made good.

Published

25 Feb 2025

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Company name anonymised since 23 Sep 2026 · Direct link