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
- Competition law 50 cases 28 % · €434.2m
- Data protection 43 cases 24 % · €65.2m
- Money laundering and terrorist financing 29 cases 16 % · €104.9m
- Capital markets and financial supervision 29 cases 16 % · €56.8m
- Health and safety and employment law 8 cases 4 % · €1.05m
- Consumer protection and online retail 8 cases 4 % ·
- Bribery and corruption 5 cases 3 % · €458.9m
- Environment and sustainability 5 cases 3 % · €375,000
- Information security and cyber 2 cases 1 % · €50,870
- Sanctions and export control 1 case 1 % ·
Who?
by sectorAll sectors
- Financial services and insurance 51 cases 28 % · €158.7m
- Other 22 cases 12 % · €97.7m
- Construction and real estate 20 cases 11 % · €143.4m
- Retail and e-commerce 17 cases 9 % · €122.9m
- Energy and utilities 13 cases 7 % · €242.3m
- Media and online platforms 10 cases 6 % · €757,070
- Telecoms, IT and software 10 cases 6 % · €66.5m
- Manufacturing and mechanical engineering 9 cases 5 % · €10.2m
- Transport, logistics and shipping 8 cases 4 % · €9.51m
- Food and agriculture 7 cases 4 % · €63.1m
- 5 more13 cases
When?
per year, by date of decision| Period | Cases | Total |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 15 | €55.8m |
| 2023 | 34 | €204.2m |
| 2024 | 45 | €338m |
| 2025 | 53 | €440.5m |
| 2026 | 33 | €83m |
180 cases
13 Aug 2026 Apple Inc., Apple GmbHBundeskartellamt: Apple aligns tracking prompts for its own and third-party apps Order
The Bundeskartellamt (Federal Cartel Office) declared binding commitments by Apple on its App Tracking Transparency Framework (ATTF), closing its proceedings under Section 19a(2) of the German Competition Act (GWB) and Article 102 TFEU. According to the preliminary assessment, third-party apps had to obtain, for personalised advertising, an additional and more off-putting consent prompt prescribed by Apple, while Apple used a prompt of its own for its own services; in future the prompts will be aligned so that content, wording and design are neutral, and app providers will be able to combine the required prompts more easily.
Platform privacy rules must be equally strict for a company's own and third-party services, otherwise they become a competition problem themselves.
Equal treatment of own and third-party services in consent prompts
- Authority / court
- Bundeskartellamt
- Area of law
- Competition law · Abuse of market power
- Legal basis
- § 19a Abs. 2 GWB, Art. 102 AEUV (Verpflichtungszusagen, Az. B7-54/25)
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Telecoms, IT and software
- Employees
- 10,000 or more
- Published
- 17 Aug 2026
- Bundeskartellamt: Apple ändert Regeln für personalisierte Werbung in Apps (17.08.2026) Press release of an authority
- Bundeskartellamt, Beschluss B7-54/25 vom 13.08.2026 (öffentliche Version) Decision of an authority
- Bundeskartellamt, Entscheidungsdatenbank: B7-54/25, Verpflichtungszusagen, Entscheidungsdatum 13.08.2026 Enforcement database of an authority
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
6 Aug 2026 AS Asphaltstraßensanierung GmbH, BITUNOVA GmbH, Kutter Spezialstraßenbau GmbH & Co. KG, Possehl Construction GmbH (inkl. VSI), Liesen…alles für den Bau GmbH, OAT GmbH/Otto Alte-Teigeler GmbHBundeskartellamt: 60.3 million EUR against DSK road repair cartel €60.3m
From around 2010 to September 2019, six suppliers of thin cold-laid asphalt surface layers (Dünne Asphaltdeckschichten in Kaltbauweise, DSK) allocated customers – primarily public contracting authorities – and contracts among themselves nationwide and coordinated prices. Germany's Federal Cartel Office (Bundeskartellamt) imposed fines of around 60.3 million EUR; all proceedings ended in settlements.
Anyone who "shares out" public contracts regionally risks fines running into millions – calculations and bids must always be prepared independently.
Customer allocation and bid rigging in public contracts
- Authority / court
- Bundeskartellamt
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- § 1 GWB, Art. 101 AEUV
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Mitigating circumstances
- Leniency bonus for Possehl/VSI, Bitunova, Kutter and AS; settlement
- Published
- 6 Aug 2026
- Bußgelder wegen Kartellabsprachen im Bereich Straßenreparatur mit DSK Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
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
29 Jul 2026 Österreichischer Rundfunk (ORF)KommAustria finds unlabelled product placement in ORF's ‘Sport aktuell’ Order
In the programme ‘Sport aktuell’ on ORF 1 on 29 July 2025, a logo wall was visible as product placement without being labelled. The Austrian Communications Authority (Kommunikationsbehörde Austria, KommAustria) found, with final effect, a violation of the ORF Act (ORF-Gesetz).
Product placements must be identified and labelled by the editorial team – including logo walls in the background.
Labelling of advertising and product placement
- Authority / court
- Kommunikationsbehörde Austria (KommAustria)
- Area of law
- Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
- Legal basis
- § 16 Abs. 5 Z 4 ORF-G
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Media and online platforms
- Published
- 29 Jul 2026
- KommAustria, Entscheidung 2025-0.606.040-3-A (ORF, Sport aktuell) Decision of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
27 Jul 2026 Banque Lombard Odier & Cie SAFederal Criminal Court fines Banque Lombard Odier CHF 3 million over money laundering €3.23m
The Bundesstrafgericht (Federal Criminal Court) found Banque Lombard Odier & Cie SA guilty of failing to take adequate organisational measures against aggravated money laundering by a former relationship manager who in 2011 and 2012 handled accounts of a criminal organisation holding proceeds of corruption in the Uzbek telecommunications market; despite warning signs, the bank's anti-money-laundering functions did not sufficiently ensure that the origin and purpose of the funds were investigated and documented. The bank was fined CHF 3,000,000 and bears procedural costs of CHF 24,561.49; it was acquitted on the remaining charges, and proceedings for acts before 27 July 2011 were dismissed as time-barred. The judgment is not final.
Warning signs about the origin of large inflows must be investigated and documented by the anti-money-laundering function itself, not just by the relationship manager.
Anti-money-laundering: investigating conspicuous inflows and documentation
- Authority / court
- Bundesstrafgericht (Strafkammer), Anklage der Bundesanwaltschaft
- Area of law
- Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls
- Legal basis
- Art. 102 Abs. 2 StGB i.V.m. Art. 305bis Ziff. 1 und 2 StGB (Urteil SK.2023.42)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Mitigating circumstances
- The long time elapsed since the offences (2011/2012) was taken into account as mitigating.
- Published
- 27 Jul 2026
Original amount 3,000,000 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Jul 2026.
- Bundesstrafgericht, Medienmitteilung vom 27.07.2026 (SK.2023.42) Court press release
- Bundesstrafgericht, Dispositiv SK.2023.42 vom 27. Juli 2026 (englische Fassung, anonymisiert) Court decision
- BA-Medienmitteilung vom 29.11.2024: Bank Lombard Odier und ein ehemaliger Mitarbeiter wegen schwerer Geldwäscherei beim Bundesstrafgericht angeklagt Press release of an authority
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
21 Jul 2026 Maxxis International GmbH, Best4Tires Berlin GmbH, Reifen Müller GmbH & Co. KGBundeskartellamt: fines over resale price maintenance in tyre distribution (Maxxis/CST) Fine
Maxxis guaranteed wholesalers fixed margins per tyre sold of the Maxxis and CST brands, monitored prices in particular on the Tyre24 platform and intervened when prices were too low. Germany's Federal Cartel Office (Bundeskartellamt) imposed fines on Maxxis and two tyre wholesalers that had pushed for the margin guarantees; at the time of publication the decisions were not final (an objection to the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf was possible).
Margin guarantees and price controls vis-à-vis dealers constitute prohibited resale price maintenance – sales teams need clear rules for price discussions.
Influencing resale prices and price monitoring on platforms
- Authority / court
- Bundeskartellamt
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- § 1 GWB (vertikale Preisbindung)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Automotive
- Mitigating circumstances
- Settlement with Maxxis and Reifen Müller
- Published
- 21 Jul 2026
Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link
Report an error
16 Jul 2026 TeamViewer SETeamViewer: cyberattack not disclosed as inside information without delay €240,000
Germany's Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht, BaFin) imposed a fine of 240,000 EUR on the software company because it had not disclosed the information about a cyberattack it had suffered as inside information without delay. The fine notice is final.
Put serious IT security incidents immediately before the ad hoc disclosure committee as well – the incident response process must take capital market disclosure into account.
Recognising security incidents as potential inside information and reporting them to the ad hoc disclosure committee
- Authority / court
- Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin)
- Area of law
- Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations
- Legal basis
- Art. 17 Abs. 1 UAbs. 1 MAR (EU) Nr. 596/2014
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Telecoms, IT and software
- Published
- 20 Jul 2026
- TeamViewer SE: BaFin setzt Geldbuße fest Decision of an authority
- Bekanntmachung der BaFin zur TeamViewer SE (Maßnahmenansicht mit Rechtskraftvermerk) Official register or notice
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 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
15 Jul 2026 CalPlus GmbH, Elektronik-Kontor Messtechnik GmbH, TVW Meßtechnik GmbHBundeskartellamt: 453,000 EUR against distributors of test and measuring equipment €453,000
From 2016 to 2022, three distributors of test and measuring equipment coordinated discounts as essential price components and informed each other of customer contacts, usually with a request for "restraint". This was evidenced by more than 400 emails; the proceedings ended in settlements.
Small distributors are liable too: merely asking a competitor to "hold back" with a customer is a prohibited customer allocation agreement.
Email contacts with competitors about customers and discounts
- Authority / court
- Bundeskartellamt
- Area of law
- Competition law · Cartels and collusion
- Legal basis
- § 1 GWB
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Manufacturing and mechanical engineering
- Mitigating circumstances
- Settlement; cooperation by Elektronik-Kontor Messtechnik taken into account
- Published
- 15 Jul 2026
- Bundeskartellamt verhängt Bußgelder wegen Preisabsprachen beim Vertrieb von Prüf- und Messgeräten Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
10 Jul 2026 Volksbank Düsseldorf Neuss eGBaFin: 210,000 EUR against Volksbank Düsseldorf Neuss over monitoring and reporting gaps €210,000
Germany's Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (BaFin) imposed fines totalling 210,000 EUR on the cooperative bank: business relationships were not monitored on an ongoing basis or with enhanced scrutiny, additional information was not obtained and suspicious activity reports were not filed or were filed late. The function of the money laundering reporting officer had been outsourced to an external service provider with several clients.
Institutions that outsource the anti-money laundering function remain responsible themselves for ongoing monitoring and timely suspicious activity reports.
Ongoing monitoring of business relationships and suspicious activity reporting
- Authority / court
- Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin)
- Area of law
- Money laundering and terrorist financing · Customer due diligence
- Legal basis
- § 56 Abs. 1 S. 1 Nr. 20, 36, 38 und 69 GwG; Bekanntmachung nach § 57 GwG
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Published
- 17 Sep 2026
- Volksbank Düsseldorf Neuss eG: Bafin setzt Bußgelder fest Press release of an authority
- Bekanntmachung zur Volksbank Düsseldorf Neuss eG (§ 57 GwG) Official register or notice
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
10 Jul 2026 Brown Capital Management LLCBrown Capital Management: voting rights notifications not submitted on time €187,500
The Baltimore-based US asset manager had not submitted voting rights notifications to the issuer and BaFin in time; the deadline is four trading days after reaching a notifiable threshold. BaFin imposed a fine of 187,500 EUR; the notice is final.
Anyone investing in German issuers needs automated threshold monitoring with clear responsibility for the four-day deadline.
Threshold monitoring and notification deadlines for shareholdings
- Authority / court
- Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin)
- Area of law
- Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations
- Legal basis
- § 33 Abs. 1 Satz 1 WpHG
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Published
- 22 Jul 2026
- Brown Capital Management LLC: BaFin setzt Geldbußen fest Decision of an authority
- Bekanntmachung der BaFin zur Brown Capital Management LLC (Maßnahmenansicht mit Rechtskraftvermerk) Official register or notice
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
23 Jun 2026 VARTA AGVARTA: late ad hoc announcement and missing half-yearly financial report €620,000
BaFin imposed fines on the battery manufacturer because it had not disclosed inside information without delay and had not published the half-yearly financial report for the 2024 financial year.
Ad hoc assessments and periodic disclosure require fixed responsibilities and deadline controls so that neither inside information nor mandatory reports are left pending.
- Authority / court
- Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin)
- Area of law
- Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations
- Legal basis
- Art. 17 Abs. 1 UAbs. 1 MAR; § 115 Abs. 1 Satz 1 WpHG
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Manufacturing and mechanical engineering
- Published
- 1 Jul 2026
- VARTA AG: BaFin setzt Geldbußen fest Decision of an authority
- Bekanntmachung der BaFin zur VARTA AG (Maßnahmenansicht mit Rechtskraftvermerk) Official register or notice
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
22 Jun 2026 Inkasso-Team AGFederal Administrative Court upholds FDPIC: Inkasso-Team was not allowed to publish debtor data Order
The debt collection company posted personal data of alleged debtors on the internet, some of it particularly sensitive, in order to obtain information on their whereabouts and to warn third parties. The Swiss Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht, A-3891/2025) upheld the ruling of the Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner (EDÖB) of 28 April 2025, according to which this constitutes an unjustified violation of privacy.
Publicly naming and shaming debtors cannot be justified under data protection law – debt collection must use less intrusive means.
- Authority / court
- Bundesverwaltungsgericht (A-3891/2025) auf Verfügung des EDÖB vom 28.04.2025
- Area of law
- Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency
- Legal basis
- DSG Art. 6, Art. 19, Art. 31
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Published
- 20 Aug 2026
- Bundesverwaltungsgericht bestätigt Entscheid des EDÖB Press release of an authority
- Urteil des Bundesverwaltungsgerichts A-3891/2025 vom 22. Juni 2026 Court decision
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
9 Jun 2026 Deutsche Wohnen SELG Berlin I confirms GDPR infringement by Deutsche Wohnen through tenant archive without deletion function Fine
In 2019, the Berlin Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information (BlnBDI) had imposed 14.5 million EUR on the housing group because tenant data such as salary statements, bank statements and social security data were held in an archive system with no means of deletion. Following the 2023 CJEU judgment on direct corporate liability, the Berlin Regional Court (Landgericht Berlin I) confirmed on 9 June 2026 infringements of data minimisation and storage limitation; the press release does not state the amount of the fine set by the court.
Ensure that archive and filing systems can technically implement deletion periods from the outset – ‘privacy by design’ is subject to fines.
- Authority / court
- Landgericht Berlin I (Bußgeldbehörde: Berliner Beauftragte für Datenschutz und Informationsfreiheit)
- Area of law
- Data protection · Data breaches and data security
- Legal basis
- Art. 5, Art. 25 Abs. 1 DSGVO
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Construction and real estate
- Liability of senior managers
- According to the CJEU (C-807/21), a breach of duty by a person in a management position need not be proven for the corporate fine.
- Published
- 10 Jun 2026
- Landgericht Berlin bestätigt Verstoß der Deutsche Wohnen SE gegen die DSGVO Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
3 Jun 2026 Wendelspiess Partners AG in LiquidationFINMA: Wendelspiess Partners breached FIDLEG duties, licence revoked Order
Wendelspiess Partners AG invested almost all the money of its more than 400 clients in a barely diversified foreign fund it had set up and managed itself, which invested mainly in a Zug-based investment company and companies linked to it; it gave insufficient information about conflicts of interest and risks, carried out no suitability check and withheld relevant information from the Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA, Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority). FINMA revoked the licence as an asset manager of the company, which is now bankrupt. Measures against individuals are not set out here. The decision is not final.
In-house funds in client portfolios are a classic conflict of interest that must be disclosed and backed by a documented suitability check.
Conflicts of interest with in-house funds; information and suitability duties
- Authority / court
- Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA)
- Area of law
- Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements
- Legal basis
- Verhaltenspflichten nach dem Finanzdienstleistungsgesetz (FIDLEG): Interessenkonflikte, Information, Eignungsprüfung; Auskunftspflicht gegenüber der FINMA
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- unknown
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Liability of senior managers
- Measures against individuals are not set out here.
- Published
- 3 Jun 2026
- FINMA-Medienmitteilung vom 03.06.2026: FINMA beendet Verfahren gegen die Wendelspiess Partners AG Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 5 Oct 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link
Report an error
4 May 2026 Berliner Verkehrsbetriebe (BVG) AöRBlnBDI reprimands BVG: deletion at service provider not checked, data breach reported too late Reprimand or warning
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.
Have service providers prove deletion after the end of the contract, and have an internal procedure that immediately turns indications of a breach into a 72-hour notification.
Reporting process for data breaches and management of service providers
- 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
- Datenschutzbeauftragte verwarnt BVG Press release of an authority
Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
1 May 2026 Swiss Fund Management AG in Liquidation; BZ Berater Zentrum AGFINMA revokes Swiss Fund Management's licence and confiscates BZ commissions Order
Swiss Fund Management AG in liquidation and BZ Berater Zentrum AG, which held around 2,000 asset management mandates, channelled investor money of around CHF 200 million, directly or via funds, into illiquid bonds of interlinked issuers that financed real estate projects of related companies, without adequately informing investors about the conflicts of interest and without adequate suitability and appropriateness checks under FIDLEG (Swiss Financial Services Act). By ruling of 1 May 2026 the Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA, Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority) revoked SFM's licence as a manager of collective assets, rejected BZ's application for a licence as an asset manager and confiscated placement commissions of more than CHF 3 million from BZ. The ruling is final.
Anyone steering client money into products of related companies must disclose the conflicts of interest and document a suitability check for each client.
Conflicts of interest and suitability checks in asset management
- Authority / court
- Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA)
- Area of law
- Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements
- Legal basis
- Verhaltensregeln nach dem Finanzdienstleistungsgesetz (FIDLEG): Interessenkonflikte, Eignungs- und Angemessenheitsprüfung
- Action
- Order
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Published
- 29 Jun 2026
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link
Report an error
20 Apr 2026 flatexDEGIRO SEBaFin fines flatexDEGIRO €1m for late ad hoc disclosure of special audit findings €1m
On 20 April 2026 BaFin (German Federal Financial Supervisory Authority) imposed a fine of 1,000,000 EUR on flatexDEGIRO SE. At the end of 2022, the company had not published the results of a special audit under § 44 KWG (German Banking Act) at flatexDEGIRO Bank AG, in which BaFin had identified deficiencies in business organisation, without delay as an ad hoc announcement, but only later as a press release. The fine is final.
Supervisory findings can also be inside information; a press release does not replace an ad hoc announcement.
Assessing supervisory audit findings as potential inside information
- Authority / court
- Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin)
- Area of law
- Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations
- Legal basis
- Art. 17 Abs. 1 UAbs. 1 MAR (Verordnung (EU) Nr. 596/2014)
- Action
- Fine
- Status of proceedings
- final
- Sector
- Financial services and insurance
- Published
- 30 Apr 2026
- BaFin: flatexDEGIRO SE: Bafin setzt Geldbuße fest (30.04.2026, geändert 07.05.2026) Press release of an authority
- BaFin: Bekanntmachung zur flatexDEGIRO SE Official register or notice
Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link