Who was sanctioned, and for what?

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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

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.

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

Checked against the official source on 5 Oct 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link

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.

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

Both companies continued to use e-mail addresses and telephone numbers from online purchases for advertising, although data subjects had objected – in some cases after deletion had been confirmed. The Swiss Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner (Eidgenössischer Datenschutz- und Öffentlichkeitsbeauftragter, EDÖB) ordered the processing for advertising to cease and the data to be deleted on request.

Authority / court

Eidgenössischer Datenschutz- und Öffentlichkeitsbeauftragter (EDÖB)

Area of law

Data protection · Marketing and consent

Legal basis

DSG Art. 6, Art. 30 Abs. 2 lit. b, Art. 31

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Published

26 Jun 2026

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

Following enforcement proceedings, the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) found serious, systematic deficiencies in anti-money laundering due diligence, organisation and risk management; the bank enabled clients to circumvent official asset freezes and executed transactions for sanctioned persons. FINMA had withdrawn the bank's licence and ordered its liquidation; with the withdrawal of the appeal before the Federal Administrative Court, the orders took effect on 27 February 2026. The day before, FinCEN had proposed designating the bank as an institution of primary money laundering concern.

Authority / court

Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA)

Area of law

Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls

Legal basis

Schweizer Geldwäschereirecht und Bankenaufsichtsrecht (laut FINMA)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

50 to 249

Published

27 Feb 2026

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

At the end of 2008 Aktiengesellschaft Hallenstadion Zürich and Ticketcorner AG agreed that the arena would only be let to organisers selling at least 50% of tickets through Ticketcorner, which hindered other ticketing providers. After the Federal Supreme Court found a competition-law infringement in 2020 and remitted the case (2C_113/2017), the Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO, Swiss Competition Commission) classed both companies' conduct in 2009 to 2011 as abuse of a dominant position and, by decision of 15 December 2025, fined the Hallenstadion around CHF 50,000 and Ticketcorner around CHF 65,000. The arena operator had concluded an amicable settlement; the decision can be appealed to the Federal Administrative Court.

Authority / court

Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO)

Area of law

Competition law · Abuse of market power

Legal basis

Kartellgesetz (KG): Missbrauch einer marktbeherrschenden Stellung; Rückweisung BGer 2C_113/2017 vom 12.02.2020

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Other

Mitigating circumstances

The arena operator concluded an amicable settlement with WEKO.

Published

22 Jan 2026

Original amount 115,000 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Dec 2025.

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

Regional suppliers of surface treatments and chip sealing in road maintenance colluded on bids and allocated territories. Switzerland's Competition Commission (Wettbewerbskommission, WEKO) imposed sanctions on Bitusag/Paupe (jointly and severally, CHF 640,000–990,000, exact amount redacted), Wyss Fils (CHF 44,000–74,000), Prodo (CHF 760) and Duckert (CHF 0) and approved amicable settlements; the investigation against Colas Suisse was discontinued.

Authority / court

Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 3 i.V.m. Abs. 1 KG, Art. 49a Abs. 1 KG

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Construction and real estate

Mitigating circumstances

Amicable settlements; leniency programme (Duckert free of sanctions)

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

Between 2011 and 2014, the bank did not take all the necessary organisational precautions, with the result that bribes flowed to Petrobras executives through several account relationships (around 71 million USD in attempted or completed aggravated money laundering). Fine of 3.5 million CHF; because of a settlement of 16 million CHF with Petrobras, the Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland (Bundesanwaltschaft, OAG) waived a compensation claim.

Authority / court

Bundesanwaltschaft

Area of law

Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls

Legal basis

Art. 102 Abs. 2 StGB i. V. m. Art. 305bis Abs. 1 und 2 StGB

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Time elapsed since the offence, organisational corrective measures after the affair became known; no compensation claim because of the payment of 16 million CHF to Petrobras.

Published

22 Aug 2025

Original amount 3,500,000 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Aug 2025.

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

Between October 2014 and July 2015, around 174 million CHF from predicate offences in the 1MDB complex passed through the bank in 43 transfers, even though negative information about the Petrosaudi managers involved was publicly available. The Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland (Bundesanwaltschaft) convicted the bank by summary penalty order and imposed 3 million CHF; a compensation claim was waived because the 1MDB fund is being compensated as a private claimant.

Authority / court

Bundesanwaltschaft

Area of law

Money laundering and terrorist financing · Customer due diligence

Legal basis

Art. 102 Abs. 2 StGB i. V. m. Art. 305bis Abs. 1 und 2 StGB

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Time elapsed since the offence, very good cooperation in the proceedings, compensation of the private claimant (1MDB).

Published

22 Aug 2025

Original amount 3,000,000 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Aug 2025.

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

The Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO, Swiss Competition Commission) found discounts negotiated jointly through the Markant cooperation to be lawful, but not opaque rebates: suppliers had to buy an ever more expensive service package from Markant, part of whose fees Markant passed on undisclosed to 16 retailers, and suppliers who refused faced collective countermeasures up to delisting. WEKO classed this as an unlawful purchasing-side price agreement and fined the 16 retailers a total of around CHF 28 million. The decision can be appealed to the Federal Administrative Court.

Authority / court

Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Kartellgesetz (KG): unzulässige einkaufsseitige Preisabrede

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Published

8 Jul 2025

Original amount 28,000,000 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 8 Jul 2025.

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

Between 2010 and 2013, 54 transfers were processed through the bank by which bribes of around 4.1 million USD connected with SBM Offshore's charter contracts with Petrobras were concealed. The bank had not classified high-risk accounts as such and had inadequately monitored transfers; the Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland (Bundesanwaltschaft) imposed a fine of 2 million CHF on the bank.

Authority / court

Bundesanwaltschaft

Area of law

Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls

Legal basis

Art. 102 Abs. 2 StGB i. V. m. Art. 305bis und Art. 322septies StGB

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Time elapsed since the offence, very good cooperation, organisational corrective measures after the Petrobras affair became known.

Published

17 Jun 2025

Original amount 2,000,000 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 Jun 2025.

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

PostFinance AG created voiceprints of its customers for authentication by voice recognition without obtaining their active consent; customers who did not want this had to object themselves. The Eidgenössischer Datenschutz- und Öffentlichkeitsbeauftragter (EDÖB, Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner) considered this processing of biometric data disproportionate and, by ruling of 16 May 2025, ordered PostFinance to obtain explicit consent in future and to delete voiceprints for which no such consent exists. PostFinance has appealed to the Federal Administrative Court.

Authority / court

Eidgenössischer Datenschutz- und Öffentlichkeitsbeauftragter (EDÖB)

Area of law

Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency

Legal basis

Bundesgesetz über den Datenschutz (DSG): Grundsatz der Verhältnismässigkeit; biometrische Daten als besonders schützenswerte Personendaten, ausdrückliche Einwilligung

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

7 Aug 2025

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

Between 2005 and 2019 Boehringer Ingelheim, Alkaloids of Australia, Alkaloids Corporation, Alchem, C2 PHARMA, Linnea and Transo-Pharm set minimum selling prices for the active ingredient butylscopolamine bromide (SNBB), allocated quotas and exchanged sensitive business information. The Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO, Swiss Competition Commission) closed the case with amicable settlements; sanctions total around CHF 600,000, with C2 PHARMA as the self-reporting party exempted in full and Transo-Pharm and Linnea in part. It is the first cartel concerning a pharmaceutical active ingredient that WEKO has sanctioned.

Authority / court

Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Kartellgesetz (KG): Preis- und Mengenabrede, einvernehmliche Regelungen, Bonusregelung

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Chemicals and pharmaceuticals

Mitigating circumstances

Amicable settlements; full immunity for C2 PHARMA (leniency programme), partial reduction for Transo-Pharm and Linnea.

Published

10 Apr 2025

Original amount 600,000 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Apr 2025.

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

In 2010, the company's legal predecessor did not take all necessary and reasonable organisational precautions to prevent a relationship manager from committing aggravated money laundering with assets derived from bribery offences in Greece. The Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland (Bundesanwaltschaft) concluded the proceedings with a summary penalty order of 1 million CHF.

Authority / court

Bundesanwaltschaft

Area of law

Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls

Legal basis

Art. 102 Abs. 2 StGB i. V. m. Art. 305bis StGB

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

27 Feb 2025

Original amount 1,000,000 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Feb 2025.

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

Between 2009 and 2011, more than 4 million EUR and more than 600,000 USD were paid to an official in Angola in order to promote ship chartering and bunkering business of the Trafigura group. The court convicted the then parent company for lacking rules on the supervision of intermediaries, imposing a fine of 3 million CHF and a compensatory claim (Ersatzforderung) of 145,634,268 USD (amount converted at the ECB rate of 31 January 2025: 148,933,982 USD in total). It was the first judgment of the Federal Criminal Court on corporate criminal liability for foreign bribery; it is not final.

Authority / court

Bundesstrafgericht (Strafkammer); Anklage durch die Bundesanwaltschaft

Area of law

Bribery and corruption · Bribery of public officials

Legal basis

Art. 102 StGB i. V. m. Art. 322septies StGB (Bestechung fremder Amtsträger); SK.2023.49

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Energy and utilities

Employees

10,000 or more

Culpability

intentional

Published

31 Jan 2025

Original amount 148,933,982 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 31 Jan 2025.

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

From December 2023 to September 2024, Cembra answered 9 of 13 access requests after the 30-day deadline had expired, and responded to all 13 people only with standard letters instead of the data actually processed about them. The Swiss Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner (Eidgenössischer Datenschutz- und Öffentlichkeitsbeauftragter, EDÖB) required the bank to provide the data subsequently.

Authority / court

Eidgenössischer Datenschutz- und Öffentlichkeitsbeauftragter (EDÖB)

Area of law

Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency

Legal basis

DSG Art. 25 Abs. 2 lit. b, Art. 25 Abs. 7

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

1 Jul 2025

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

The Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) found serious breaches of risk management obligations and of the requirement to guarantee irreproachable business conduct: the financial group monitored its distribution chain inadequately and in some cases worked with dubious, unregulated distributors that sold products in countries not intended for them without authorisation. FINMA ordered governance requirements, the termination of these relationships, the appointment of an audit agent and the confiscation of 9.3 million CHF in profits; the ruling was not yet final at the time of publication.

Authority / court

Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Finanzmarktaufsichtsgesetz (FINMAG)

Action

Disgorgement of profits

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Good cooperation in the proceedings; Leonteq had already strengthened compliance and distribution controls of its own accord and terminated relationships with suspicious distributors

Original amount 9,300,000 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 12 Dec 2024.

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

A French publishing group charged a Swiss bookseller considerably higher purchase prices for direct supply in France than are customary there, although the bookseller had no reasonable alternatives. The Swiss Competition Commission (WEKO) found an abuse of relative market power and ordered the publishing group to grant the bookseller the sales and discount terms applicable in France for direct purchases, less admissible additional costs for the Swiss market; the publishing group bears the procedural costs of CHF 254,865. According to WEKO (as of March 2025), an appeal against the decision was pending before the Federal Administrative Court.

Authority / court

Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO)

Area of law

Competition law · Abuse of market power

Legal basis

Art. 7 Abs. 1 und 2 lit. g KG (relative Marktmacht), Art. 30 Abs. 1 KG

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Media and online platforms

Published

21 Nov 2024

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 23 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA, Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority) found that the bank, despite warnings, inadequately checked and documented beneficial ownership and the background of transactions in business relationships with complex structures possibly attributable to a now-deceased businessman accused of tax evasion, which at times held up to USD 1.7 billion. FINMA confiscated CHF 12.7 million of unlawfully earned profits, prohibited the bank from taking on new clients with increased money-laundering risks until compliance is restored, ordered a review of all client relationships and of higher-risk transactions from 2018 to 2022, and appointed an audit agent. The ruling issued in June 2023 has been final since August 2023.

Authority / court

Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA)

Area of law

Money laundering and terrorist financing · Customer due diligence

Legal basis

Finanzmarktaufsichtsrecht: Geldwäschereiprävention, angemessene Organisation und Risikomanagement (Einziehung zugunsten der Staatskasse)

Action

Disgorgement of profits

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

The bank cooperated in the proceedings and took its own organisational, operational and personnel measures during the proceedings.

Liability of senior managers

FINMA opened three enforcement proceedings against individuals.

Published

17 Sep 2024

Original amount 12,700,000 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 Sep 2024.

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 17 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The group failed to take all reasonable organisational precautions to prevent the bribery of foreign public officials by a business partner in connection with the acquisition of minority stakes in two mining companies in the DR Congo in 2011. The Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland (Bundesanwaltschaft, BA) issued a summary penalty order (Strafbefehl) imposing a fine of 2 million CHF and a compensatory claim of 150 million USD (amount converted at the ECB rate of 5 August 2024: 152,357,266 USD in total); further matters from 2007–2017 were discontinued.

Authority / court

Bundesanwaltschaft (BA)

Area of law

Bribery and corruption · Bribery of public officials

Legal basis

Art. 102 Abs. 2 StGB (Unternehmensverantwortlichkeit) i. V. m. Bestechung fremder Amtsträger; Strafbefehl

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Steel and metals

Employees

10,000 or more

Culpability

intentional

Published

5 Aug 2024

Original amount 152,357,266 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 5 Aug 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 5 Aug 2026 · Direct link

The Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) found that, for two politically exposed persons, the bank insufficiently clarified the origin and purpose of assets – transactions of more than 300 million USD from a Lebanese state institution between 2002 and 2015 – and only reported them to the reporting office in September 2020. It ordered a review of all PEP relationships, a ban on new PEP relationships until the review is completed and the appointment of an audit agent; the decision was not final at the time of publication (date of the announcement used as decision date).

Authority / court

Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA)

Area of law

Money laundering and terrorist financing · Customer due diligence

Legal basis

Schweizer Geldwäschereirecht (laut FINMA)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

18 Jun 2024

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 18 Jun 2026 · Direct link

Companies engaged in the collection, transport and disposal of waste in Valais colluded on bids. WEKO imposed a sanction of CHF 95,138 on the transport and waste disposal company (another company: CHF 0), approved amicable settlements and apportioned the procedural costs among four companies.

Authority / court

Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 3 i.V.m. Abs. 1 KG, Art. 49a Abs. 1 KG

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Mitigating circumstances

Amicable settlements; leniency programme (another company free of sanctions)

Original amount 95,138 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Jun 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 10 Jun 2026 · Direct link

A gravel extraction joint venture, the largest gravel and landfill pit in its region, and its shareholders coordinated through the joint venture's board, granted the shareholders cheaper gravel prices and transport subsidies, undertook not to extract gravel themselves in the joint venture's area and for a time tied the dumping of excavated material to gravel purchases. The Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO, Swiss Competition Commission) imposed sanctions totalling CHF 5,303,750: CHF 3,131,100 on the joint venture, CHF 383,150 on a first shareholder group of three companies, CHF 304,150 on a second group of three companies, CHF 460,750 on a third group of two companies, CHF 242,500 on a gravel works, CHF 387,100 on a fourth group of two companies and CHF 395,000 on a fifth group of two companies, together with conduct requirements concerning the joint venture's board and management. With the exception of individual points, the ruling is under appeal before the Federal Administrative Court (as of December 2025).

Authority / court

Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Art. 49a Abs. 1 i.V.m. Art. 5 Abs. 1, 3 und 4 KG; bei KAGA zusätzlich Art. 7 Abs. 1 i.V.m. Abs. 2 KG

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Construction and real estate

Mitigating circumstances

Several parties concluded amicable settlements with the WEKO secretariat, which WEKO approved.

Published

27 Aug 2024

Original amount 5,303,750 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 21 May 2024.

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 21 May 2026 · Direct link

Following the hacker attack on an IT service provider, the Swiss Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner (Eidgenössischer Datenschutz- und Öffentlichkeitsbeauftragter, EDÖB) found that personal data of two federal offices had reached the service provider via support processes without the necessary data protection safeguards. The service provider subsequently retained the data in breach of data protection law and partly in breach of contract.

Authority / court

Eidgenössischer Datenschutz- und Öffentlichkeitsbeauftragter (EDÖB)

Area of law

Data protection · Data processors

Legal basis

Datenschutzgesetz (DSG)

Action

Other

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Published

1 May 2024

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 1 May 2026 · Direct link

In the Lava Jato case complex, the Bundesanwaltschaft (BA, Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland) found that between 2011 and 2014 a Swiss private bank did not adequately establish beneficial owners and the background of transactions at its Lugano office, enabling two employees to commit money laundering exceeding USD 20 million. By summary penalty order of 28 March 2024 the bank was fined CHF 750,000; the BA dropped the charge of bribery of foreign public officials. The bank waived its right to object, so the penalty order becomes final.

Authority / court

Bundesanwaltschaft (BA)

Area of law

Money laundering and terrorist financing · Internal controls

Legal basis

Art. 102 Abs. 2 StGB i.V.m. Art. 305bis Ziff. 2 StGB

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

The bank's cooperation with the Office of the Attorney General was taken into account.

Published

4 Apr 2024

Original amount 750,000 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 Mar 2024.

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 28 Mar 2026 · Direct link

The Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) found serious infringements of anti-money laundering rules in PEP relationships: insufficient clarification of the origin of assets, failure to report to the reporting office despite unexplained transaction purposes and a serious breach of the duty to provide information, because a critical internal audit report was not handed over. It confiscated 3.9 million CHF in profits, imposed a capital surcharge of 19 million CHF and a two-year ban on new PEP and high-risk relationships (date of the announcement used as decision date).

Authority / court

Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA)

Area of law

Money laundering and terrorist financing · Suspicious activity reports

Legal basis

Schweizer Geldwäschereirecht; Gewinneinziehung und Auskunftspflicht nach Finanzmarktaufsichtsrecht (laut FINMA)

Action

Disgorgement of profits

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

25 Mar 2024

Original amount 3,900,000 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 25 Mar 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 25 Mar 2026 · Direct link

The bank repeatedly breached capital requirements and organisational and risk-management requirements, kept faulty accounts, breached duties to provide information and report, and despite a ban on risk-increasing business took on higher-risk client relationships without clarifying their background; the deficiencies persisted despite measures already ordered in 2022. On 8 March 2024 the Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA, Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority) revoked the bank's licence and found that it no longer offered the guarantee of irreproachable business conduct; because minimum capital was clearly undershot and over-indebtedness was feared, FINMA opened bankruptcy proceedings on 13 June 2024. At that time the licence revocation was under appeal before the Federal Administrative Court.

Authority / court

Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Bankenaufsichtsrecht: Eigenmittelvorschriften, Organisation und Risikomanagement, Sorgfaltspflichten zur Geldwäschereibekämpfung; Bewilligungsentzug

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

50 to 249

Repeat case

yes

Published

13 Jun 2024

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 8 Mar 2026 · Direct link

The Geneva-based commodities trading house failed to take all reasonable organisational precautions to prevent foreign public officials from being bribed on its behalf in connection with the Ecuadorian oil industry from 2013 to 2017. The Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland (BA) – in coordination with US authorities – ordered the trading house to pay around 86.7 million CHF, of which 4.3 million CHF is a fine.

Authority / court

Bundesanwaltschaft (BA)

Area of law

Bribery and corruption · Bribery of public officials

Legal basis

Art. 102 StGB (Unternehmensverantwortlichkeit) i. V. m. Bestechung fremder Amtsträger

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Energy and utilities

Culpability

intentional

Published

1 Mar 2024

Original amount 86,700,000 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 1 Mar 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 1 Mar 2026 · Direct link

The Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO, Swiss Competition Commission) prohibited a dominant Swiss delivery company from acquiring a private mail delivery company because the concentration would have eliminated effective competition for national addressed bulk letters over 50 grams for business customers and created or strengthened the acquirer's dominant position in further letter, parcel and newspaper delivery markets. WEKO rejected the claimed rescue takeover because another prospective buyer offered a more competitive solution; the procedural costs of CHF 98,000 are borne equally by both parties.

Authority / court

Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO)

Area of law

Competition law · Merger control

Legal basis

Art. 10 Abs. 2 KG i.V.m. Art. 32 und 33 KG (Zusammenschlusskontrolle)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Published

19 Jan 2024

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 15 Jan 2026 · Direct link

The group expanded its fibre-optic network in such a way that competitors were not given Layer 1 access from the local exchanges. WEKO considered this to be an abuse of a dominant position, imposed a sanction of CHF 18,362,014, required the group to retrofit the network and imposed procedural costs of CHF 927,307.

Authority / court

Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO)

Area of law

Competition law · Abuse of market power

Legal basis

Art. 7 Abs. 1 i.V.m. Abs. 2 lit. a und e KG, Art. 49a Abs. 1 KG

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Employees

10,000 or more

Original amount 18,362,014 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 4 Dec 2023.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 4 Dec 2025 · Direct link

On its online platform the portal produces individual rankings of insurance offers through which users can request quotes; for these requests a sister company registered as an intermediary receives payments from the insurers. In enforcement proceedings the Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA, Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority) found that the portal itself acts as an unaffiliated insurance intermediary even after changing the process, and ordered it to register in the intermediaries register without delay and to meet its information duties towards consumers. The ruling was not final at the time of publication.

Authority / court

Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision

Legal basis

Versicherungsaufsichtsrecht: Registrierungs- und Informationspflichten ungebundener Versicherungsvermittler

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Media and online platforms

Published

29 Sep 2023

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 29 Sep 2025 · Direct link

The bank held a position of 24 billion USD vis-à-vis a hedge fund, responded inadequately to limit breaches and paid out a further 2.4 billion USD shortly before the collapse. FINMA found serious and systematic breaches of organisational requirements and ordered the bank's legal successor to introduce group-wide position limits and risk-based remuneration.

Authority / court

Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Bankengesetz (Organisations- und Risikomanagementpflichten)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not reported here.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 5 · Company name anonymised since 24 Jul 2025 · Direct link

According to WEKO's findings, the operator of a landfill in the canton of Basel-Landschaft abused its dominant position (Art. 7 para. 2 lit. b KG (Swiss Cartel Act), discrimination against trading partners). The sanction is between CHF 762,048 and 1,143,072 (exact amount redacted in the published version); in addition, there are procedural costs of CHF 196,530.

Authority / court

Wettbewerbskommission (WEKO)

Area of law

Competition law · Abuse of market power

Legal basis

Art. 7 Abs. 1 und Abs. 2 lit. b KG, Art. 49a Abs. 1 KG

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Construction and real estate

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 3 Jul 2025 · Direct link

In 2021 the foundation sold its own tokens to around 500 private individuals for around EUR 3 million in an initial coin offering, although the announced learning platform with marketplace never went live; the Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA, Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority) classed the token as a hybrid token with the character of a security and found that the foundation, together with its founder, had acted without authorisation as a securities firm and had also acted without authorisation as a financial intermediary, and had breached its duty to provide information. Because bankruptcy proceedings had already been opened against the foundation in March 2023 owing to over-indebtedness, FINMA only formally established the serious breach of supervisory law. The ruling was not final at the time of publication.

Authority / court

Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision

Legal basis

Finanzmarktrecht: unerlaubte Tätigkeit als Wertpapierhaus und als Finanzintermediärin; Auskunftspflicht gegenüber der FINMA

Action

Other

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

17 May 2023

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 17 May 2025 · Direct link

Because of deficiencies in corporate governance, risk management and compliance, employees of a Swiss security technology provider were able to bribe public officials in connection with business in Brazil, Colombia and Venezuela. The Bundesanwaltschaft (BA, Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland) convicted the company by summary penalty order and imposed a fine of CHF 1,000,000 and a compensatory claim of CHF 80,000,000, CHF 81 million in total. The penalty order against the company is final because the company waived its right to object.

Authority / court

Bundesanwaltschaft (BA)

Area of law

Bribery and corruption · Bribery of public officials

Legal basis

Art. 102 Abs. 2 StGB i.V.m. Art. 322septies StGB; Ersatzforderung nach Art. 71 Abs. 1 StGB

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Other

Published

27 Apr 2023

Original amount 81,000,000 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Apr 2023.

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 27 Apr 2025 · Direct link

The bank had launched four supply-chain finance funds with companies of an external financing group, which were closed in March 2021 holding around USD 10 billion of client money; the Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA, Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority) found that the bank had in practice left the selection and review of receivables to the partner, had warnings handled by functions that were not independent and gave FINMA partly incorrect information, and classed this as a serious breach of its duties regarding risk management and organisation. FINMA ordered that the executive board periodically review the around 500 most important business relationships for counterparty risks and that the responsibilities of the around 600 most senior managers be recorded in writing; an audit agent monitors implementation.

Authority / court

Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Finanzmarktaufsichtsrecht: Pflichten zu Risikomanagement und angemessener Betriebsorganisation; Pflichten als Asset Managerin

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

10,000 or more

Liability of senior managers

FINMA opened four enforcement proceedings against former managers of the bank and requires a responsibilities document for the most senior managers in future.

Published

28 Feb 2023

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 28 Feb 2025 · Direct link

From 2013 employees of an electrical engineering group set up a bribery scheme in which inflated payments to subcontractors were used to channel benefits to public officials in South Africa and win contracts for the construction of a coal-fired power station (bribes of at least CHF 1.3 million, contracts worth at least USD 200 million). By summary penalty order, the Bundesanwaltschaft (BA, Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland) convicted a Swiss services company of the group for failing to take all reasonable organisational measures to prevent this, fined it CHF 4,000,000 (statutory maximum CHF 5 million) and ordered it to pay procedural costs of CHF 50,000. The BA waived a compensatory claim because the group had already paid USD 104 million to South Africa in 2020.

Authority / court

Bundesanwaltschaft (BA)

Area of law

Bribery and corruption · Bribery of public officials

Legal basis

Art. 102 Abs. 2 StGB i.V.m. Art. 322septies StGB

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Mitigating circumstances

Cooperation taken into account as mitigating; no compensatory claim because of a USD 104 million settlement payment already made to South Africa in 2020.

Published

2 Dec 2022

Original amount 4,000,000 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 2 Dec 2022.

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 2 Dec 2024 · Direct link