search


keyboard_tab Digital Service Act 2022/2065 EN

BG CS DA DE EL EN ES ET FI FR GA HR HU IT LV LT MT NL PL PT RO SK SL SV print pdf

2022/2065 EN cercato: 'court' . Output generated live by software developed by IusOnDemand srl


expand index court:


whereas court:


definitions:


cloud tag: and the number of total unique words without stopwords is: 868

 

Article 17

Statement of reasons

1.   Providers of hosting services shall provide a clear and specific statement of reasons to any affected recipients of the service for any of the following restrictions imposed on the ground that the information provided by the recipient_of_the_service is illegal_content or incompatible with their terms_and_conditions:

(a)

any restrictions of the visibility of specific items of information provided by the recipient_of_the_service, including removal of content, disabling access to content, or demoting content;

(b)

suspension, termination or other restriction of monetary payments;

(c)

suspension or termination of the provision of the service in whole or in part;

(d)

suspension or termination of the recipient_of_the_service's account.

2.   Paragraph 1 shall only apply where the relevant electronic contact details are known to the provider. It shall apply at the latest from the date that the restriction is imposed, regardless of why or how it was imposed.

Paragraph 1 shall not apply where the information is deceptive high-volume commercial content.

3.   The statement of reasons referred to in paragraph 1 shall at least contain the following information:

(a)

information on whether the decision entails either the removal of, the disabling of access to, the demotion of or the restriction of the visibility of the information, or the suspension or termination of monetary payments related to that information, or imposes other measures referred to in paragraph 1 with regard to the information, and, where relevant, the territorial scope of the decision and its duration;

(b)

the facts and circumstances relied on in taking the decision, including, where relevant, information on whether the decision was taken pursuant to a notice submitted in accordance with Article 16 or based on voluntary own-initiative investigations and, where strictly necessary, the identity of the notifier;

(c)

where applicable, information on the use made of automated means in taking the decision, including information on whether the decision was taken in respect of content detected or identified using automated means;

(d)

where the decision concerns allegedly illegal_content, a reference to the legal ground relied on and explanations as to why the information is considered to be illegal_content on that ground;

(e)

where the decision is based on the alleged incompatibility of the information with the terms_and_conditions of the provider of hosting services, a reference to the contractual ground relied on and explanations as to why the information is considered to be incompatible with that ground;

(f)

clear and user-friendly information on the possibilities for redress available to the recipient_of_the_service in respect of the decision, in particular, where applicable through internal complaint-handling mechanisms, out-of-court dispute settlement and judicial redress.

4.   The information provided by the providers of hosting services in accordance with this Article shall be clear and easily comprehensible and as precise and specific as reasonably possible under the given circumstances. The information shall, in particular, be such as to reasonably allow the recipient_of_the_service concerned to effectively exercise the possibilities for redress referred to in of paragraph 3, point (f).

5.   This Article shall not apply to any orders referred to in Article 9.

Article 20

Internal complaint-handling system

1.   Providers of online_platforms shall provide recipients of the service, including individuals or entities that have submitted a notice, for a period of at least six months following the decision referred to in this paragraph, with access to an effective internal complaint-handling system that enables them to lodge complaints, electronically and free of charge, against the decision taken by the provider of the online_platform upon the receipt of a notice or against the following decisions taken by the provider of the online_platform on the grounds that the information provided by the recipients constitutes illegal_content or is incompatible with its terms_and_conditions:

(a)

decisions whether or not to remove or disable access to or restrict visibility of the information;

(b)

decisions whether or not to suspend or terminate the provision of the service, in whole or in part, to the recipients;

(c)

decisions whether or not to suspend or terminate the recipients’ account;

(d)

decisions whether or not to suspend, terminate or otherwise restrict the ability to monetise information provided by the recipients.

2.   The period of at least six months referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall start on the day on which the recipient_of_the_service is informed about the decision in accordance with Article 16(5) or Article 17.

3.   Providers of online_platforms shall ensure that their internal complaint-handling systems are easy to access, user-friendly and enable and facilitate the submission of sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated complaints.

4.   Providers of online_platforms shall handle complaints submitted through their internal complaint-handling system in a timely, non-discriminatory, diligent and non-arbitrary manner. Where a complaint contains sufficient grounds for the provider of the online_platform to consider that its decision not to act upon the notice is unfounded or that the information to which the complaint relates is not illegal and is not incompatible with its terms_and_conditions, or contains information indicating that the complainant’s conduct does not warrant the measure taken, it shall reverse its decision referred to in paragraph 1 without undue delay.

5.   Providers of online_platforms shall inform complainants without undue delay of their reasoned decision in respect of the information to which the complaint relates and of the possibility of out-of-court dispute settlement provided for in Article 21 and other available possibilities for redress.

6.   Providers of online_platforms shall ensure that the decisions, referred to in paragraph 5, are taken under the supervision of appropriately qualified staff, and not solely on the basis of automated means.

Article 21

Out-of-court dispute settlement

1.   Recipients of the service, including individuals or entities that have submitted notices, addressed by the decisions referred to in Article 20(1) shall be entitled to select any out-of-court dispute settlement body that has been certified in accordance with paragraph 3 of this Article in order to resolve disputes relating to those decisions, including complaints that have not been resolved by means of the internal complaint-handling system referred to in that Article.

Providers of online_platforms shall ensure that information about the possibility for recipients of the service to have access to an out-of-court dispute settlement, as referred to in the first subparagraph, is easily accessible on their online_interface, clear and user-friendly.

The first subparagraph is without prejudice to the right of the recipient_of_the_service concerned to initiate, at any stage, proceedings to contest those decisions by the providers of online_platforms before a court in accordance with the applicable law.

2.   Both parties shall engage, in good faith, with the selected certified out-of-court dispute settlement body with a view to resolving the dispute.

Providers of online_platforms may refuse to engage with such out-of-court dispute settlement body if a dispute has already been resolved concerning the same information and the same grounds of alleged illegality or incompatibility of content.

The certified out-of-court dispute settlement body shall not have the power to impose a binding settlement of the dispute on the parties.

3.   The Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the out-of-court dispute settlement body is established shall, for a maximum period of five years, which may be renewed, certify the body, at its request, where the body has demonstrated that it meets all of the following conditions:

(a)

it is impartial and independent, including financially independent, of providers of online_platforms and of recipients of the service provided by providers of online_platforms, including of individuals or entities that have submitted notices;

(b)

it has the necessary expertise in relation to the issues arising in one or more particular areas of illegal_content, or in relation to the application and enforcement of terms_and_conditions of one or more types of online_platform, allowing the body to contribute effectively to the settlement of a dispute;

(c)

its members are remunerated in a way that is not linked to the outcome of the procedure;

(d)

the out-of-court dispute settlement that it offers is easily accessible, through electronic communications technology and provides for the possibility to initiate the dispute settlement and to submit the requisite supporting documents online;

(e)

it is capable of settling disputes in a swift, efficient and cost-effective manner and in at least one of the official languages of the institutions of the Union;

(f)

the out-of-court dispute settlement that it offers takes place in accordance with clear and fair rules of procedure that are easily and publicly accessible, and that comply with applicable law, including this Article.

The Digital Services Coordinator shall, where applicable, specify in the certificate:

(a)

the particular issues to which the body’s expertise relates, as referred to in point (b) of the first subparagraph; and

(b)

the official language or languages of the institutions of the Union in which the body is capable of settling disputes, as referred to in point (e) of the first subparagraph.

4.   Certified out-of-court dispute settlement bodies shall report to the Digital Services Coordinator that certified them, on an annual basis, on their functioning, specifying at least the number of disputes they received, the information about the outcomes of those disputes, the average time taken to resolve them and any shortcomings or difficulties encountered. They shall provide additional information at the request of that Digital Services Coordinator.

Digital Services Coordinators shall, every two years, draw up a report on the functioning of the out-of-court dispute settlement bodies that they certified. That report shall in particular:

(a)

list the number of disputes that each certified out-of-court dispute settlement body has received annually;

(b)

indicate the outcomes of the procedures brought before those bodies and the average time taken to resolve the disputes;

(c)

identify and explain any systematic or sectoral shortcomings or difficulties encountered in relation to the functioning of those bodies;

(d)

identify best practices concerning that functioning;

(e)

make recommendations as to how to improve that functioning, where appropriate.

Certified out-of-court dispute settlement bodies shall make their decisions available to the parties within a reasonable period of time and no later than 90 calendar days after the receipt of the complaint. In the case of highly complex disputes, the certified out-of-court dispute settlement body may, at its own discretion, extend the 90 calendar day period for an additional period that shall not exceed 90 days, resulting in a maximum total duration of 180 days.

5.   If the out-of-court dispute settlement body decides the dispute in favour of the recipient_of_the_service, including the individual or entity that has submitted a notice, the provider of the online_platform shall bear all the fees charged by the out-of-court dispute settlement body, and shall reimburse that recipient, including the individual or entity, for any other reasonable expenses that it has paid in relation to the dispute settlement. If the out-of-court dispute settlement body decides the dispute in favour of the provider of the online_platform, the recipient_of_the_service, including the individual or entity, shall not be required to reimburse any fees or other expenses that the provider of the online_platform paid or is to pay in relation to the dispute settlement, unless the out-of-court dispute settlement body finds that that recipient manifestly acted in bad faith.

The fees charged by the out-of-court dispute settlement body to the providers of online_platforms for the dispute settlement shall be reasonable and shall in any event not exceed the costs incurred by the body. For recipients of the service, the dispute settlement shall be available free of charge or at a nominal fee.

Certified out-of-court dispute settlement bodies shall make the fees, or the mechanisms used to determine the fees, known to the recipient_of_the_service, including to the individuals or entities that have submitted a notice, and to the provider of the online_platform concerned, before engaging in the dispute settlement.

6.   Member States may establish out-of-court dispute settlement bodies for the purposes of paragraph 1 or support the activities of some or all out-of-court dispute settlement bodies that they have certified in accordance with paragraph 3.

Member States shall ensure that any of their activities undertaken under the first subparagraph do not affect the ability of their Digital Services Coordinators to certify the bodies concerned in accordance with paragraph 3.

7.   A Digital Services Coordinator that has certified an out-of-court dispute settlement body shall revoke that certification if it determines, following an investigation either on its own initiative or on the basis of the information received by third parties, that the out-of-court dispute settlement body no longer meets the conditions set out in paragraph 3. Before revoking that certification, the Digital Services Coordinator shall afford that body an opportunity to react to the findings of its investigation and its intention to revoke the out-of-court dispute settlement body’s certification.

8.   Digital Services Coordinators shall notify to the Commission the out-of-court dispute settlement bodies that they have certified in accordance with paragraph 3, including where applicable the specifications referred to in the second subparagraph of that paragraph, as well as the out-of-court dispute settlement bodies the certification of which they have revoked. The Commission shall publish a list of those bodies, including those specifications, on a dedicated website that is easily accessible, and keep it up to date.

9.   This Article is without prejudice to Directive 2013/11/EU and alternative dispute resolution procedures and entities for consumers established under that Directive.

Article 24

Transparency reporting obligations for providers of online_platforms

1.   In addition to the information referred to in Article 15, providers of online_platforms shall include in the reports referred to in that Article information on the following:

(a)

the number of disputes submitted to the out-of-court dispute settlement bodies referred to in Article 21, the outcomes of the dispute settlement, and the median time needed for completing the dispute settlement procedures, as well as the share of disputes where the provider of the online_platform implemented the decisions of the body;

(b)

the number of suspensions imposed pursuant to Article 23, distinguishing between suspensions enacted for the provision of manifestly illegal_content, the submission of manifestly unfounded notices and the submission of manifestly unfounded complaints.

2.   By 17 February 2023 and at least once every six months thereafter, providers shall publish for each online_platform or online_search_engine, in a publicly available section of their online_interface, information on the average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union, calculated as an average over the period of the past six months and in accordance with the methodology laid down in the delegated acts referred to in Article 33(3), where those delegated acts have been adopted.

3.   Providers of online_platforms or of online_search_engines shall communicate to the Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment and the Commission, upon their request and without undue delay, the information referred to in paragraph 2, updated to the moment of such request. That Digital Services Coordinator or the Commission may require the provider of the online_platform or of the online_search_engine to provide additional information as regards the calculation referred to in that paragraph, including explanations and substantiation in respect of the data used. That information shall not include personal data.

4.   When the Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment has reasons to consider, based the information received pursuant to paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Article, that a provider of online_platforms or of online_search_engines meets the threshold of average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union laid down in Article 33(1), it shall inform the Commission thereof.

5.   Providers of online_platforms shall, without undue delay, submit to the Commission the decisions and the statements of reasons referred to in Article 17(1) for the inclusion in a publicly accessible machine-readable database managed by the Commission. Providers of online_platforms shall ensure that the information submitted does not contain personal data.

6.   The Commission may adopt implementing acts to lay down templates concerning the form, content and other details of reports pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 88.

Article 35

Mitigation of risks

1.   Providers of very large online_platforms and of very large online_search_engines shall put in place reasonable, proportionate and effective mitigation measures, tailored to the specific systemic risks identified pursuant to Article 34, with particular consideration to the impacts of such measures on fundamental rights. Such measures may include, where applicable:

(a)

adapting the design, features or functioning of their services, including their online_interfaces;

(b)

adapting their terms_and_conditions and their enforcement;

(c)

adapting content_moderation processes, including the speed and quality of processing notices related to specific types of illegal_content and, where appropriate, the expeditious removal of, or the disabling of access to, the content notified, in particular in respect of illegal hate speech or cyber violence, as well as adapting any relevant decision-making processes and dedicated resources for content_moderation;

(d)

testing and adapting their algorithmic systems, including their recommender_systems;

(e)

adapting their advertising systems and adopting targeted measures aimed at limiting or adjusting the presentation of advertisements in association with the service they provide;

(f)

reinforcing the internal processes, resources, testing, documentation, or supervision of any of their activities in particular as regards detection of systemic risk;

(g)

initiating or adjusting cooperation with trusted flaggers in accordance with Article 22 and the implementation of the decisions of out-of-court dispute settlement bodies pursuant to Article 21;

(h)

initiating or adjusting cooperation with other providers of online_platforms or of online_search_engines through the codes of conduct and the crisis protocols referred to in Articles 45 and 48 respectively;

(i)

taking awareness-raising measures and adapting their online_interface in order to give recipients of the service more information;

(j)

taking targeted measures to protect the rights of the child, including age verification and parental control tools, tools aimed at helping minors signal abuse or obtain support, as appropriate;

(k)

ensuring that an item of information, whether it constitutes a generated or manipulated image, audio or video that appreciably resembles existing persons, objects, places or other entities or events and falsely appears to a person to be authentic or truthful is distinguishable through prominent markings when presented on their online_interfaces, and, in addition, providing an easy to use functionality which enables recipients of the service to indicate such information.

2.   The Board, in cooperation with the Commission, shall publish comprehensive reports, once a year. The reports shall include the following:

(a)

identification and assessment of the most prominent and recurrent systemic risks reported by providers of very large online_platforms and of very large online_search_engines or identified through other information sources, in particular those provided in compliance with Articles 39, 40 and 42;

(b)

best practices for providers of very large online_platforms and of very large online_search_engines to mitigate the systemic risks identified.

Those reports shall present systemic risks broken down by the Member States in which they occurred and in the Union as a whole, as applicable.

3.   The Commission, in cooperation with the Digital Services Coordinators, may issue guidelines on the application of paragraph 1 in relation to specific risks, in particular to present best practices and recommend possible measures, having due regard to the possible consequences of the measures on fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter of all parties involved. When preparing those guidelines the Commission shall organise public consultations.

Article 67

Requests for information

1.   In order to carry out the tasks assigned to it under this Section, the Commission may, by simple request or by decision, require the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine concerned, as well as any other natural or legal person acting for purposes related to their trade, business, craft or profession that may be reasonably aware of information relating to the suspected infringement, including organisations performing the audits referred to in Article 37 and Article 75(2), to provide such information within a reasonable period.

2.   When sending a simple request for information to the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine concerned or other person referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, the Commission shall state the legal basis and the purpose of the request, specify what information is required and set the period within which the information is to be provided, and the fines provided for in Article 74 for supplying incorrect, incomplete or misleading information.

3.   Where the Commission requires the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine concerned or other person referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article to supply information by decision, it shall state the legal basis and the purpose of the request, specify what information is required and set the period within which it is to be provided. It shall also indicate the fines provided for in Article 74 and indicate or impose the periodic penalty payments provided for in Article 76. It shall further indicate the right to have the decision reviewed by the court of Justice of the European Union.

4.   The providers of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine concerned or other person referred to in paragraph 1 or their representatives and, in the case of legal persons, companies or firms, or where they have no legal personality, the persons authorised to represent them by law or by their constitution shall supply the information requested on behalf of the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine concerned or other person referred to in paragraph 1. Lawyers duly authorised to act may supply the information on behalf of their clients. The latter shall remain fully responsible if the information supplied is incomplete, incorrect or misleading.

5.   At the request of the Commission, the Digital Services Coordinators and other competent authorities shall provide the Commission with all necessary information to carry out the tasks assigned to it under this Section.

6.   The Commission shall, without undue delay after sending the simple request or the decision referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, send a copy thereof to the Digital Services Coordinators, through the information sharing system referred to in Article 85.

Article 69

Power to conduct inspections

1.   In order to carry out the tasks assigned to it under this Section, the Commission may conduct all necessary inspections at the premises of the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine concerned or of another person referred to in Article 67(1).

2.   The officials and other accompanying persons authorised by the Commission to conduct an inspection shall be empowered to:

(a)

enter any premises, land and means of transport of the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine concerned or of the other person concerned;

(b)

examine the books and other records related to the provision of the service concerned, irrespective of the medium on which they are stored;

(c)

take or obtain in any form copies of or extracts from such books or other records;

(d)

require the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine or the other person concerned to provide access to and explanations on its organisation, functioning, IT system, algorithms, data-handling and business practices and to record or document the explanations given;

(e)

seal any premises used for purposes related to the trade, business, craft or profession of the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine or of the other person concerned, as well as books or other records, for the period and to the extent necessary for the inspection;

(f)

ask any representative or member of staff of the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine or the other person concerned for explanations on facts or documents relating to the subject-matter and purpose of the inspection and to record the answers;

(g)

address questions to any such representative or member of staff relating to the subject-matter and purpose of the inspection and to record the answers.

3.   Inspections may be carried out with the assistance of auditors or experts appointed by the Commission pursuant to Article 72(2), and of Digital Services Coordinator or other competent national authorities of the Member State in the territory of which the inspection is conducted.

4.   Where the production of required books or other records related to the provision of the service concerned is incomplete or where the answers to questions asked under paragraph 2 of this Article are incorrect, incomplete or misleading, the officials and other accompanying persons authorised by the Commission to conduct an inspection shall exercise their powers upon production of a written authorisation specifying the subject matter and purpose of the inspection and the penalties provided for in Articles 74 and 76. In good time before the inspection, the Commission shall inform the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State in the territory in which the inspection is to be conducted thereof.

5.   During inspections, the officials and other accompanying persons authorised by the Commission, the auditors and experts appointed by the Commission, the Digital Services Coordinator or the other competent authorities of the Member State in the territory of which the inspection is conducted may require the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine or other person concerned to provide explanations on its organisation, functioning, IT system, algorithms, data-handling and business conducts, and may address questions to its key personnel.

6.   The provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine or other natural or legal person concerned shall be required to submit to an inspection ordered by decision of the Commission. The decision shall specify the subject matter and purpose of the inspection, set the date on which it is to begin and indicate the penalties provided for in Articles 74 and 76 and the right to have the decision reviewed by the court of Justice of the European Union. The Commission shall consult the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State on territory of which the inspection is to be conducted prior to taking that decision.

7.   Officials of, and other persons authorised or appointed by, the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State on the territory of which the inspection is to be conducted shall, at the request of that Digital Services Coordinator or of the Commission, actively assist the officials and other accompanying persons authorised by the Commission in relation to the inspection. To this end, they shall have the powers listed in paragraph 2.

8.   Where the officials and other accompanying persons authorised by the Commission find that the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine or the other person concerned opposes an inspection ordered pursuant to this Article, the Member State in the territory of which the inspection is to be conducted shall, at the request of those officials or other accompanying persons and in accordance with the national law of the Member State, afford them necessary assistance, including, where appropriate under that national law, in the form of coercive measures taken by a competent law enforcement authority, so as to enable them to conduct the inspection.

9.   If the assistance provided for in paragraph 8 requires authorisation from a national judicial authority in accordance with the national law of the Member State concerned, such authorisation shall be applied for by the Digital Services Coordinator of that Member State at the request of the officials and other accompanying persons authorised by the Commission. Such authorisation may also be applied for as a precautionary measure.

10.   Where the authorisation referred to in paragraph 9 is applied for, the national judicial authority before which a case has been brought shall verify that the Commission decision ordering the inspection is authentic and that the coercive measures envisaged are neither arbitrary nor excessive having regard to the subject matter of the inspection. When conducting such verification, the national judicial authority may ask the Commission, directly or through the Digital Services Coordinators of the Member State concerned, for detailed explanations, in particular those concerning the grounds on which the Commission suspects an infringement of this Regulation, concerning the seriousness of the suspected infringement and concerning the nature of the involvement of the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine or of the other person concerned. However, the national judicial authority shall not call into question the necessity for the inspection nor demand information from the case file of the Commission. The lawfulness of the Commission decision shall be subject to review only by the court of Justice of the European Union.

Article 77

Limitation period for the imposition of penalties

1.   The powers conferred on the Commission by Articles 74 and 76 shall be subject to a limitation period of five years.

2.   Time shall begin to run on the day on which the infringement is committed. However, in the case of continuing or repeated infringements, time shall begin to run on the day on which the infringement ceases.

3.   Any action taken by the Commission or by the Digital Services Coordinator for the purpose of the investigation or proceedings in respect of an infringement shall interrupt the limitation period for the imposition of fines or periodic penalty payments. Actions which interrupt the limitation period shall include, in particular, the following:

(a)

requests for information by the Commission or by a Digital Services Coordinator;

(b)

inspection;

(c)

the opening of a proceeding by the Commission pursuant to Article 66(1).

4.   Each interruption shall start time running afresh. However, the limitation period for the imposition of fines or periodic penalty payments shall expire at the latest on the day on which a period equal to twice the limitation period has elapsed without the Commission having imposed a fine or a periodic penalty payment. That period shall be extended by the time during which the limitation period has been suspended pursuant to paragraph 5.

5.   The limitation period for the imposition of fines or periodic penalty payments shall be suspended for as long as the decision of the Commission is the subject of proceedings pending before the court of Justice of the European Union.

Article 78

Limitation period for the enforcement of penalties

1.   The power of the Commission to enforce decisions taken pursuant to Articles 74 and 76 shall be subject to a limitation period of five years.

2.   Time shall begin to run on the day on which the decision becomes final.

3.   The limitation period for the enforcement of penalties shall be interrupted:

(a)

by notification of a decision varying the original amount of the fine or periodic penalty payment or refusing an application for variation;

(b)

by any action of the Commission, or of a Member State acting at the request of the Commission, designed to enforce payment of the fine or periodic penalty payment.

4.   Each interruption shall start time running afresh.

5.   The limitation period for the enforcement of penalties shall be suspended for so long as:

(a)

time to pay is allowed;

(b)

enforcement of payment is suspended pursuant to a decision of the court of Justice of the European Union or to a decision of a national court.

Article 81

Review by the court of Justice of the European Union

In accordance with Article 261 TFEU, the court of Justice of the European Union has unlimited jurisdiction to review decisions by which the Commission has imposed fines or periodic penalty payments. It may cancel, reduce or increase the fine or periodic penalty payment imposed.

Article 82

Requests for access restrictions and cooperation with national courts

1.   Where all powers pursuant to this Section to bring about the cessation of an infringement of this Regulation have been exhausted, the infringement persists and causes serious harm which cannot be avoided through the exercise of other powers available under Union or national law, the Commission may request the Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment of the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine concerned to act pursuant to Article 51(3).

Prior to making such request to the Digital Services Coordinator, the Commission shall invite interested parties to submit written observations within a period that shall not be less than 14 working days, describing the measures it intends to request and identifying the intended addressee or addressees thereof.

2.   Where the coherent application of this Regulation so requires, the Commission, acting on its own initiative, may submit written observations to the competent judicial authority referred to Article 51(3). With the permission of the judicial authority in question, it may also make oral observations.

For the purpose of the preparation of its observations only, the Commission may request that judicial authority to transmit or ensure the transmission to it of any documents necessary for the assessment of the case.

3.   When a national court rules on a matter which is already the subject matter of a decision adopted by the Commission under this Regulation, that national court shall not take any decision which runs counter to that Commission decision. National courts shall also avoid taking decisions which could conflict with a decision contemplated by the Commission in proceedings it has initiated under this Regulation. To that effect, a national court may assess whether it is necessary to stay its proceedings. This is without prejudice to Article 267 TFEU.


whereas









keyboard_arrow_down