Denmark Has No EAA Fine Figure — Because a Criminal Court Sets It
A handful of countries don't publish a maximum. Denmark's silence is different from the others: its penalty isn't an open-ended administrative fine, it's a criminal one. The act names no amount, and — we checked — neither do the explanatory remarks the legislature published alongside it.
Quick answer
Denmark's EAA law (LOV nr 801 af 07/06/2022, as amended by Lov nr. 637/2024) has exactly one penal provision, § 57. It punishes seven categories of breach «med bøde» — with a fine — and states no amount, no tier and no ceiling anywhere. A bøde is a criminal penalty, so the level is set by the courts and prosecution practice rather than by statute. Companies are expressly caught: § 57 applies corporate criminal liability under Chapter 5 of the Danish Criminal Code. Four authorities enforce it, led by Sikkerhedsstyrelsen. No cases have been reported.
The most thoroughly checked "no figure" in the EU
Denmark, Greece, Malta and Finland publish no fixed maximum for an accessibility breach, and Spain has none of its own (it falls back on a general disability law). They get lumped together, and they shouldn't be — the reasons differ completely. Spain routes to whichever sector law applies. Finland's mechanism is a recurring conditional fine with no ceiling by design. Greece and Malta each have their own story, covered on their own pages.
Denmark's is the plainest, and the best evidenced. The whole penal provision opens:
« Medmindre højere straf er forskyldt efter anden lovgivning, straffes med bøde den, der: »
("Unless a higher penalty is warranted under other legislation, a fine shall be imposed on any person who:")
— LOV nr 801, § 57 (Retsinformation)
— followed by the seven categories: failing the core accessibility requirements, failing to inform the authority, breaching the manufacturer, importer or distributor duties, breaching an authorised representative's mandate, obstructing an inspection, failing to comply with an authority's decision, and misusing the CE marking.
That's it. No amount attaches to any of them. Every ministerial delegation clause in the act was checked and each is scoped to technical implementation or complaints-board administration — none empowers a minister to set a fine level.
And the gap is deliberate, not an oversight. We went back to the bill as introduced, including its bemærkninger — the explanatory remarks Danish legislatures publish to guide courts on how a new provision should be applied. Danish bills routinely state an intended bødeniveau where the legislature wants one. This one doesn't. The remarks discuss implementing the directive and the regulatory structure and say nothing about how large an accessibility fine should be.
So any euro figure attributed to Denmark has no basis in the statute, in the delegated powers, or in the legislative history.
Why "no figure" here means something different
The word doing the work is bøde. In Danish law that is a criminal fine, not an administrative one. Three consequences follow:
A court sets the amount. Not a regulator exercising discretion within a band — a criminal court, or a prosecutor issuing a bødeforelæg (a fine notice the defendant can accept out of court). The level will be established by prosecution practice and case law as the first matters come through, which means Denmark's number doesn't exist yet in any form. It will be built by precedent.
Companies are criminally liable, expressly:
« Der kan pålægges selskaber m.v. (juridiske personer) strafansvar efter reglerne i straffelovens 5. kapitel. »
("Criminal liability may be imposed on companies etc. (legal persons) under the rules in Chapter 5 of the Criminal Code.")
— LOV nr 801, § 57
This is a real statutory hook, not a formality. It puts Denmark alongside Ireland, Luxembourg and Cyprus in the group where an accessibility breach is a criminal matter — a fact entirely obscured by describing Denmark as simply having "no fixed fine."
The act doesn't close the ceiling. Medmindre højere straf er forskyldt efter anden lovgivning — unless a higher penalty is warranted under other legislation. The provision expressly yields to any heavier penalty available elsewhere in Danish law.
Who enforces it — and a discrepancy worth resolving
The act itself allocates supervision four ways:
| Authority | Covers |
|---|---|
| Sikkerhedsstyrelsen (Danish Safety Technology Authority) | The default and by far the largest remit: all products, plus audiovisual media access, banking, e-books and e-commerce |
| Energistyrelsen (Danish Energy Agency) | Electronic communications services |
| Trafikstyrelsen (Danish Transport Authority) | Air, bus and rail transport, plus ship-transport self-service terminals |
| Søfartsstyrelsen (Danish Maritime Authority) | The remaining ship-transport elements |
Secondary sources — including industry bodies — commonly give a six-authority list, adding Finanstilsynet for banking and Konkurrence- og Forbrugerstyrelsen for consumer protection. On a direct read of the statute, banking sits with Sikkerhedsstyrelsen, not the financial supervisor. If you are advising on Denmark, the four-authority allocation is the one grounded in the text; treat the six-authority version as needing verification before you rely on it.
Separately: any source naming Erhvervsstyrelsen as Denmark's accessibility regulator is wrong. It does not appear in the act at all.
Scope is complete
Unlike Belgium's explicitly partial transposition, Denmark covers the full EAA service list from the outset — electronic communications, audiovisual media access, all four transport modes, consumer banking, e-books, e-commerce, and 112 emergency communications — plus the complete product list. On paper, it is among the tidiest transpositions in the Union.
The standard carve-outs apply: micro-enterprises providing services are exempt, and a trader that received outside funding to improve accessibility cannot invoke the disproportionate-burden exemption — the same funding trap that appears in Poland, Luxembourg and elsewhere.
Has it been enforced yet?
No prosecutions or fines have been reported.
Denmark is, however, one of the markets where a first case should be visible when it comes. Because the penalty is criminal, enforcement produces a prosecution or an accepted bødeforelæg rather than an internal regulatory decision — outputs that surface publicly in a way that administrative findings in Portugal or Slovenia do not. The absence of Danish cases is therefore closer to real evidence of inactivity than it is in most of the fragmented administrative regimes.
What this means for your business
The honest advice for Denmark is uncomfortable: nobody can tell you what non-compliance costs, and that is the point. There is no ceiling to plan against and no band to sit within. The first Danish accessibility fine will set the reference for the ones after it, and until then the range is whatever a court considers proportionate for a criminal offence committed by a company.
- Treat Denmark as a criminal-compliance question rather than a budget line — the same posture as Ireland, even though Denmark's § 57 provides for a fine rather than prison.
- Document good faith. Where there is no tariff, dated evidence of your accessibility work is what shapes a court's view of seriousness.
- Get to EN 301 549 / WCAG 2.1 AA, and engage with Sikkerhedsstyrelsen if it makes contact.
Frequently asked questions
What is the EAA fine in Denmark?
There isn't a stated one. § 57 punishes seven categories of breach with a bøde — a criminal fine — and names no amount, tier or ceiling. Neither does the bill's explanatory commentary.
Who decides the amount, then?
The courts, through prosecution practice and case law, or a prosecutor issuing a fine notice the company can accept. No Danish accessibility fine has yet been set, so there is no precedent.
Is it really a criminal penalty?
Yes. § 57 also applies corporate criminal liability under Chapter 5 of the Danish Criminal Code, so companies are directly caught.
Who enforces it?
Four authorities under the act: Sikkerhedsstyrelsen (products, AV media, banking, e-books, e-commerce), Energistyrelsen (electronic communications), Trafikstyrelsen (air, bus, rail) and Søfartsstyrelsen (maritime).
I've seen a euro figure quoted for Denmark. Is it real?
No. No amount appears in the act, in any delegated power under it, or in the legislative remarks.
Related
- ← Back to EAA Fines by Country — the full 27-state comparison
- Official text: LOV nr 801 af 07/06/2022 (Retsinformation)
- Ireland's EAA fines — the other criminal regime, with a stated ceiling and prison terms
- Spain's EAA fines — a different kind of "no single figure"
