keyboard_tab REGIS - Reg. Intermediation Services 2019/1150 EN

(1) Online intermediation services are key enablers of entrepreneurship and new business models, trade and innovation, which can also improve consumer welfare and which are increasingly used by both the private and public sectors.

  They offer access to new markets and commercial opportunities allowing undertakings to exploit the benefits of the internal market.

  They allow consumers in the Union to exploit those benefits, in particular by increasing their choice of goods and services, as well as by contributing to offering competitive pricing online, but they also raise challenges that need to be addressed in order to ensure legal certainty.

(4) Similarly, online_search_engines can be important sources of Internet traffic for undertakings which offer goods or services to consumers through websites and can therefore significantly affect the commercial success of such corporate_website_users offering their goods or services online in the internal market.

  In this regard, the ranking of websites by providers of online_search_engines, including of those websites through which corporate_website_users offer their goods and services to consumers, has an important impact on consumer choice and the commercial success of those corporate_website_users.

  Even in the absence of a contractual relationship with corporate_website_users, providers of online_search_engines can therefore, in effect, behave unilaterally in a way that can be unfair and that can be harmful to the legitimate interests of corporate_website_users and, indirectly, also of consumers in the Union.

(5) The nature of the relationship between providers of online_intermediation_services and business_users might also lead to situations in which business_users often have limited possibilities to seek redress where unilateral actions of the providers of those services lead to a dispute.

  In many cases, those providers do not offer accessible and effective internal complaint-handling systems.

  Existing alternative out-of-court dispute settlement mechanisms can also be ineffective for a variety of reasons, including a lack of specialised mediators and business_users’ fear of retaliation.

(6) Online intermediation services and online_search_engines, as well as the transactions facilitated by those services, have an intrinsic cross-border potential and are of particular importance for the proper functioning of the Union’s internal market in today’s economy.

  The potentially unfair and harmful commercial practices of certain providers of those services, and the lack of effective redress mechanisms, hamper the full realisation of that potential and negatively affect the proper functioning of the internal market.

(7) A targeted set of mandatory rules should be established at Union level to ensure a fair, predictable, sustainable and trusted online business environment within the internal market.

  In particular, business_users of online_intermediation_services should be afforded appropriate transparency, as well as effective redress possibilities, throughout the Union in order to facilitate cross-border business within the Union and thereby improve the proper functioning of the internal market and to address possible emerging fragmentation in the specific areas covered by this Regulation.

(22) A provider of online_intermediation_services can have legitimate reasons to decide to restrict, suspend or terminate the provision of its services to a given business_user, including by delisting individual goods or services of a given business_user or effectively removing search results.

  Short of being suspended, providers of online_intermediation_services can also restrict individual listings of business_users; for example, through their demotion or by negatively affecting a business_user’s appearance (‘dimming’) which can include lowering its ranking.

  However, given that such decisions can significantly affect the interests of the business_user concerned, they should be provided, prior to or at the time of the restriction or suspension taking effect, with a statement of reasons for that decision on a durable_medium.

  To minimise the negative impact of such decisions on business_users, providers of online_intermediation_services should also allow an opportunity to clarify the facts that led to that decision in the framework of the internal complaint-handling process, which will help the business_user, where this is possible, to re-establish compliance.

  In addition, where the provider of online_intermediation_services revokes the decision to restrict, suspend or terminate, for example because the decision was made in error or the infringement of terms_and_conditions that led to this decision was not committed in bad faith and has been remedied in a satisfactory manner, the provider should reinstate the business_user concerned without undue delay, including providing the business_user with any access to personal or other data, or both, available prior to the decision.

(37) In order to enable business_users, including those whose use of the relevant online_intermediation_services might have been restricted, suspended or terminated, to have access to immediate, suitable and effective possibilities of redress, providers of online_intermediation_services should provide for an internal complaint-handling system.

  That internal complaint-handling system should be based on principles of transparency and equal treatment applied to equivalent situations, aimed at ensuring that a significant proportion of complaints can be solved bilaterally by the provider of online_intermediation_services and the relevant business_user in a reasonable period of time.

  The providers of online_intermediation_services might maintain in force during the duration of the complaint the decision that they have taken.

  Any attempt to reach an agreement through the internal complaint handling-process does not affect the rights of providers of online_intermediation_services or business_users to initiate judicial proceedings at any time during or after the internal complaint-handling process.

  In addition, providers of online_intermediation_services should publish and, at least annually, verify information on the functioning and effectiveness of their internal complaint-handling system to help business_users to understand the main types of issues that can arise in the context of the provision of different online_intermediation_services and the possibility of reaching a quick and effective bilateral resolution.

(38) The requirements of this Regulation regarding the internal complaint-handling systems aim to allow providers of online_intermediation_services a reasonable degree of flexibility when operating those systems and addressing individual complaints, so as to minimise any administrative burden.

  In addition, the internal complaint-handling systems should allow providers of online_intermediation_services to address, where necessary, in a proportionate manner any use in bad faith which certain business_users might seek to make of those systems.

  In light of the costs of setting up and operating such systems, it is appropriate to exempt from those obligations any providers of online_intermediation_services which constitute small enterprises, in line with the relevant provisions of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC (9).

  The consolidation rules laid down in that Recommendation ensure that any circumvention is prevented.

  That exemption should not affect the right of such enterprises to set up, on a voluntary basis, an internal complaint-handling system that complies with the criteria set out in this Regulation.

(39) The use of the word ‘internal’ should not be understood as preventing the delegation of an internal complaint-handling system to an external service provider or other corporate structure, as long as such a provider or other corporate structure has full authority and the ability to ensure compliance of the internal complaint-handling system with the requirements in this Regulation.

(51) Since the objective of this Regulation, namely to ensure a fair, predictable, sustainable and trusted online business environment within the internal market, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, but can rather, by reason of its scale and effects, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union.

  In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.