keyboard_tab Digital Service Act 2022/2065 EN

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.

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.

1.   Where a crisis occurs, the Commission, acting upon a recommendation of the Board may adopt a decision, requiring one or more providers of very large online_platforms or of very large online_search_engines to take one or more of the following actions:

(a)	assess whether, and if so to what extent and how, the functioning and use of their services significantly contribute to a serious threat as referred to in paragraph 2, or are likely to do so;

(b)	identify and apply specific, effective and proportionate measures, such as any of those provided for in Article 35(1) or Article 48(2), to prevent, eliminate or limit any such contribution to the serious threat identified pursuant to point (a) of this paragraph;

(c)

report to the Commission by a certain date or at regular intervals specified in the decision, on the assessments referred to in point (a), on the precise content, implementation and qualitative and quantitative impact of the specific measures taken pursuant to point (b) and on any other issue related to those assessments or those measures, as specified in the decision.

When identifying and applying measures pursuant to point (b) of this paragraph, the service provider or providers shall take due account of the gravity of the serious threat referred to in paragraph 2, of the urgency of the measures and of the actual or potential implications for the rights and legitimate interests of all parties concerned, including the possible failure of the measures to respect the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter.

2.   For the purpose of this Article, a crisis shall be deemed to have occurred where extraordinary circumstances lead to a serious threat to public security or public health in the Union or in significant parts of it.

3.   When taking the decision referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission shall ensure that all of the following requirements are met:

(a)

the actions required by the decision are strictly necessary, justified and proportionate, having regard in particular to the gravity of the serious threat referred to in paragraph 2, the urgency of the measures and the actual or potential implications for the rights and legitimate interests of all parties concerned, including the possible failure of the measures to respect the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter;

(b)	the decision specifies a reasonable period within which specific measures referred to in paragraph 1, point (b), are to be taken, having regard, in particular, to the urgency of those measures and the time needed to prepare and implement them;

(c)	the actions required by the decision are limited to a period not exceeding three months.

4.   After adopting the decision referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission shall, without undue delay, take the following steps:

(a)	notify the decision to the provider or providers to which the decision is addressed;

(b)	make the decision publicly available; and

(c)	inform the Board of the decision, invite it to submit its views thereon, and keep it informed of any subsequent developments relating to the decision.

5.   The choice of specific measures to be taken pursuant to paragraph 1, point (b), and to paragraph 7, second subparagraph, shall remain with the provider or providers addressed by the Commission’s decision.

6.   The Commission may on its own initiative or at the request of the provider, engage in a dialogue with the provider to determine whether, in light of the provider’s specific circumstances, the intended or implemented measures referred to in paragraph 1, point (b), are effective and proportionate in achieving the objectives pursued. In particular, the Commission shall ensure that the measures taken by the service provider under paragraph 1, point (b), meet the requirements referred to in paragraph 3, points (a) and (c).

7.   The Commission shall monitor the application of the specific measures taken pursuant to the decision referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article on the basis of the reports referred to in point (c) of that paragraph and any other relevant information, including information it may request pursuant to Article 40 or 67, taking into account the evolution of the crisis. The Commission shall report regularly to the Board on that monitoring, at least on a monthly basis.

Where the Commission considers that the intended or implemented specific measures pursuant to paragraph 1, point (b), are not effective or proportionate it may, after consulting the Board, adopt a decision requiring the provider to review the identification or application of those specific measures.

8.   Where appropriate in view of the evolution of the crisis, the Commission, acting on the Board’s recommendation, may amend the decision referred to in paragraph 1 or in paragraph 7, second subparagraph, by:

(a)

revoking the decision and, where appropriate, requiring the very large online_platform or very large online_search_engine to cease to apply the measures identified and implemented pursuant to paragraph 1, point (b), or paragraph 7, second subparagraph, in particular where the grounds for such measures do not exist anymore;

(b)	extending the period referred to paragraph 3, point (c), by a period of no more than three months;

(c)	taking account of experience gained in applying the measures, in particular the possible failure of the measures to respect the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter.

9.   The requirements of paragraphs 1 to 6 shall apply to the decision and to the amendment thereof referred to in this Article.

10.   The Commission shall take utmost account of the recommendation of the Board issued pursuant to this Article.

11.   The Commission shall report to the European Parliament and to the Council on a yearly basis following the adoption of decisions in accordance with this Article, and, in any event, three months after the end of the crisis, on the application of the specific measures taken pursuant to those decisions.

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.

1.   If, during proceedings under this Section, the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine concerned offers commitments to ensure compliance with the relevant provisions of this Regulation, the Commission may by decision make those commitments binding on the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine concerned and declare that there are no further grounds for action.

2.   The Commission may, upon request or on its own initiative, reopen the proceedings:

(a)	where there has been a material change in any of the facts on which the decision was based;

(b)	where the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine concerned acts contrary to its commitments; or

(c)	where the decision was based on incomplete, incorrect or misleading information provided by the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine concerned or other person referred to in Article 67(1).

3.   Where the Commission considers that the commitments offered by the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine concerned are unable to ensure effective compliance with the relevant provisions of this Regulation, it shall reject those commitments in a reasoned decision when concluding the proceedings.