What changed between the plenary report and the adopted text

Change 2

Removed:SHORT JUSTIFICATION

Added:P9_TC1-COD(2023)0376

Change 3

Changed:OnPosition 17of Octoberthe 2023,European theParliament Commissionadopted submittedat thefirst proposalreading foron 13 March 2024 with a view to the adoption of Directive (EU) 2024/… of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2013/11/EU on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes, as well as Directives (EU) 2015/2302, (EU) 2019/2161 and (EU) 2020/1828 to the Council and the European Parliament. On 13 March 2024, the European Parliament adopted its first reading position.

Change 4

Removed:The interinstitutional negotiations started on 20 February 2025 with a view to reaching an early second reading agreement. They were successfully concluded on 26 June 2025. The provisionally agreed text was confirmed by COREPER on 16 July 2025 and endorsed by the IMCO Committee on 25 September 2025.

Added:(Text with EEA relevance)

Removed:Since the Council’s first reading position adopted on 17 November 2025 reflects the agreement reached between the Parliament and the Council in early second reading interinstitutional negotiations, including also the changes resulting from the legal-linguistic revision, the Rapporteur recommends that it is endorsed by the European Parliament without amendments, so that the Directive can be adopted swiftly and enter into force as soon as possible.

Added:THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Added:Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 114 thereof,

Added:Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

Added:After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments,

Added:Having regard the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee,

Added:Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure,

Added:Whereas:

Added:(1) Directive 2013/11/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council was adopted in order to ensure that consumers within the Union have access to high quality alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”) procedures to resolve the contractual disputes arising from the sale of goods or provision of services by traders established in the Union to consumers resident in the Union. It provides for the availability of ADR procedures for all types of domestic and cross-border consumer disputes within the Union, ensuring that ADR procedures meet minimum quality standards. It requires Member States to monitor the performance of ADR entities. To increase consumer awareness and promote the use of ADR, it also provides that traders should be required to inform their consumers of the possibility to settle their dispute out-of-court through ADR procedures.

Added:(2) In 2019 the Commission adopted a report on the implementation of the Directive 2013/11/EU and of Regulation (EU) No 524/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council which revealed that Directive 2013/11/EU has led to increased coverage of consumer markets by quality ADR entities throughout the Union. However, the report also identified that consumer and business uptake of ADR procedures was lagging behind in some sectors and Member States. One reason for this was the low level of awareness of traders and consumers about such procedures in Member States where they had only recently been introduced. Another reason was the lack of trust of consumers and traders in unregulated ADR entities. Data provided by national competent authorities in early 2022, as well as the evaluation of the implementation of the Directive 2013/11/EU conducted in 2023, suggest that the uptake remained relatively stable (apart from a small increase of cases related to Covid-19 pandemic). Most stakeholders consulted in the context of that evaluation confirmed that the lack of awareness and understanding of ADR procedures by consumers, low engagement by traders, gaps in ADR coverage in certain Member States, high costs and complex national ADR procedures and differences in the competences of ADR entities, are frequent factors hindering the uptake of ADR procedures. There are additional barriers in cross-border ADR like language, lack of knowledge of the applicable law, as well as specific access difficulties for vulnerable consumers.

Added:(2a) In order to reach its full potential and deliver for consumers, this Directive should require participation to be mandatory for air carriers falling under the scope of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004, provided that it does not prevent the parties from exercising their right of access to the judicial system. This is the case, given that several studies have highlighted the high number of consumer complaints in the transport and tourism sector, especially in the field of air passengers rights. [Am. 1]

Added:(2b) ADR entities should communicate to the competent authorities a list of traders who systematically and unduly refuse to comply with the outcomes of ADR procedures. Furthermore, Member States should ensure that, where they do not comply with the outcome of an ADR procedure, traders are required to provide the other parties to the ADR procedure with a written explanation. [Am. 2]

Added:(3) Since at least two out of five online transactions made by consumers residing in the Union are with traders based in third countries, the scope of Directive 2013/11/EU should be extended to allow those third country traders willing to participate in an ADR procedure to do so. No procedural impediments should hinder consumers residing in the Union from resolving disputes against traders, irrespective of their establishment, if the traders accept to follow an ADR procedure through an ADR entity established in a Member State. In accordance with applicable Union law, the consumer should be able to commence a procedure in the Member State where he or she resides. It should not be possible to access ADR procedures in a Member State in which neither the consumer resides nor the trader is established. [Am. 3]

Added:(4) The complexity of consumer disputes has evolved significantly since the adoption of Directive 2013/11/EU. DigitilisationDigitalisation of goods and services, the growing importance of e-commerce and digital advertising in the formation of consumer contracts has resulted in a rise in the number of consumers being exposed to misleading online information and manipulative interfaces preventing them from making informed purchasing decisions. It is, therefore, necessary to clarify that contractual disputes arising from the sale of goods or services include digital content and digital services, and to extend the scope of Directive 2013/11/EU, beyond such disputes so that consumers are also able to seek redress for practices harming them at a pre-contractual stage, irrespective of whetherprovided they later become bound by a contract, or at a post-contractual stage. [Am. 4]

Added:(5) Moreover, Directive 2013/11/EU should also cover consumer rights arising from Union legislation which governs relationships between consumers and traders when there is no relationship of a contractual nature, with respect to the right to access and to pay for goods and services without undergoing discrimination based on nationality, place of residence or of establishment, as provided for in Articles 4 and 5 of Regulation (EU) 2018/302 of the European Parliament and of the Council, or on any ground as referred to in Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; the right to open and switch bank accounts as provided for in Articles 9, 10, 11, and 16 of Directive 2014/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council and to not be discriminated against as provided for in Article 15 of that Directive; the right to receive transparent information on retail conditions for roaming calls and SMS messages as provided for in Articles 13, 14 and 15 of Regulation (EU) 2022/612 of the European Parliament and of the Council, the right to price transparency in air fares and rates as provided for in Article 23 of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council. Therefore, it should be provided that disputes arising in relation to such categories of consumer rights can be dealt with in ADR procedures. [Am. 5]

Added:(5a) Member States should take note of the Commission Recommendation of 17 October 2023 on quality requirements for dispute resolution procedures offered by online marketplaces and Union trade associations. The Commission should be encouraged to complement this Directive with a Regulation on quality requirements for dispute resolution procedures offered by online marketplaces and Union trade associations. [Am. 6]

Added:(6) Member States should have the right to apply ADR procedures also to disputes that relate to other non-contractual rights stemming from Union law, including rights stemming from Articles 101 and 102 TFEU or rights of users provided in Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 of the European Parliament and of the Council. This is without prejudice of public enforcement of those rules.

Added:(7) Where a dispute arises between a provider of an online platform and a recipient of that service in relation to that provider's activities in moderating illegal or harmful content on its platform, Article 21 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council on out-of-court dispute settlement applies to that dispute, in accordance with Article 2(4) of that Regulation, given that it lays down more detailed rules in relation to such disputes.

Added:(8) The definitions of ‘domestic dispute’ and ‘cross-border dispute’ should be adapted accordingly to reflect the extension of the scope of Directive 2013/11/EU.

Added:(9) To ensure that ADR procedures are well-suited for the digital age where communication takes place online, including in a cross-border context, it is necessary to ensure swift and fair processes for all consumers. Member States should ensure that ADR entities established in their territories have the competence to provide dispute resolution procedures in disputes between traders established outside of the Union and consumers residing in their territory.

Added:(10) Member States should ensure that ADR should enable consumer to initiate and follow ADR procedures also offline if requested. It should also be ensured that when digital tools are provided, those can be used by all consumers, including vulnerable consumers or those with varying levels of digital literacy. Members States should ensure that, upon request, parties to the disputes, in particular consumers, always have access to a review of automated procedures by a natural person, who should be independent and impartial. [Am. 7]

Added:(10a) In order to enhance consumer and traders’ trust and increase their participation in ADR procedures, it is fundamental to ensure that the functioning and work of ADR entities is of good quality. In this sense, the expertise and knowledge of the ADR entity staff should be updated on a regular basis. Therefore, ADR entities should provide natural persons in charge of ADR procedures with regular training to ensure their knowledge is continuously updated. [Am. 8]

Added:(11) Member States should also enable ADR entities with sufficient knowledge to bundle similar cases against a specific trader, where the natural persons in charge of ADR procedures have sufficient knowledge and expertise to deal with the case. This would help to make ADR outcomes consistent for consumers subjected to the same illegal practice, and more cost-efficient for ADR entities and for traders. Consumers should be informed accordingly and should be given the opportunity to refuse from having their dispute bundled. [Am. 9]

Added:(12) Member States should also not allow the introduction of disproportionate rules as regards the reasons that an ADR entity may invoke to refuse the handling of a dispute, such as the obligation to use the company escalation system after a first negative contact with the complaints handling service, or the obligation to prove that a specific part of a company’s after sales service was contacted.

Added:(13) Under Directive 2013/11/EU, Member States may introduce national legislation to make trader participation in ADR compulsory in sectors they deem fit, in addition to sector-specific Union legislation which provides for mandatory participation of traders in ADR. To encourage traders’ participation in the ADR procedures and to ensure due and swift ADR procedures, traders should be required, especially in cases where their participation is not compulsory, to respond within a specific period that should not exceed 15 working days to enquiries made by ADR entities on whether they intend to participate to the proposed procedure. An extension of this deadline could be granted for complex disputes or as a result of exceptional circumstances, such as a period of high activity or an external crisis. [Am. 10]

Added:(13a) In order to ensure that consumers can expect full independence and impartiality, as provided for in this Directive, when dealing with all types of ADR entities, including ADR entities where the natural persons in charge of dispute resolution are employed or remunerated exclusively by the individual trader, also commonly referred to as ‘in-house’ ADR entities, such ADR entities should only have access to data strictly related to the case and explicitly provided by the trader or the consumer. [Am. 11]

Added:(14) To reduce information and reporting requirements and to save costs for ADR entities, national competent authorities and traders, reporting and information requirements should be simplified and the amount of information provided by ADR entities to the competent authorities should be reduced. [Am. 12]

Added:(14a) ADR procedures should preferably be free of charge for the consumer. In the event that costs are applied, those costs should not exceed a nominal fee. Furthermore, in order to increase the accessibility and attractiveness of ADR procedures to consumers, those fees should be reimbursable. It is important to clarify that such reimbursement is to be made by Member States, in full compliance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, and not by other entities, such as the other party to the ADR procedure. [Am. 13]

Added:(14b) In many Member States, consumers are still insufficiently informed about the existence and services proposed by ADR entities. In order to increase consumer awareness about ADR entities and traders participating in ADR procedures, traders should provide ADR information in a clear, prominent, comprehensible and easily accessible way. Where the trader has a website, it should present the information on it. Traders should also provide such information in their general terms and conditions and on invoices issued by them. In order to facilitate communication, traders should make an email address available allowing consumers to contact them, including for the purpose of ADR procedures. [Am. 14]

Added:(14c) A swift cooperation between the different actors involved in the enforcement of consumer rights is crucial to ensure the overall consistency and coherence of the consumer enforcement system. In cases where an unfair commercial practice has been brought to the attention of ADR entities, those entities should report to their national competent authorities or consumer organisation if they have credible reasons to suspect that an unfair commercial practice and terms has occurred. [Am. 15]

Added:(15) To provide effective assistance to consumers and traders in cross-border disputes, it is necessary to ensure that Member States establish ADR contact points with clearly defined tasks. European Consumer Centres (“ECCs”) are well placed to perform such tasks, as they are specialised in assisting consumers with issues with their cross-border purchases, but Member States should also be able to choose other bodies with relevant expertise. Member States should communicate those designated ADR contact points should be communicated to the Commission and ensure that they have adequate budgetary and human resources. Consumers should be entitled to carry out a cross-border ADR procedure in an official language of the Member State in which they are resident. [Am. 16]

Added:(15a) To ensure procedural fairness, consumers engaging in cross-border disputes should engage with the ADR contact point determined by the consumer’s place of residence, thereby discouraging selective choice of ADR contact points for convenience or advantageous outcomes. [Am. 17]

Added:(15b) In cross-border disputes, ADR entities should use Union law as a point of reference for the resolution of the disputes. Nevertheless, in both domestic and cross-border disputes, ADR entities should always take into account the remedies available in Union and applicable national law. [Am. 18]

Added:(16) Despite the fact that ADR procedures are meant to be simple, consumers may be assisted by a third party of their choice during ADR procedures. Member States should ensure that such assistance is provided in good faith to allow a fair procedure and in full transparency, in particular regarding the possible fees required in exchange for the assistance. In addition, Member States are encouraged to extend the benefit of consumer ADR systems to micro enterprises and self employed to ensure that such businesses have access to cheap and quality alternative dispute resolution systems to solve contractual disputes. [Am. 19]

Added:(16a) Not all ADR entities have the expertise to deal with non-contractual matters, in particular unfair commercial practices and terms. Therefore, procedures of ADR entities in this area should be limited to unfair commercial practices and terms with a personal scope, and hence only cover matters where a damage or loss, material or immaterial, has occurred to the consumer directly. In addition, only ADR entities that can demonstrate necessary expertise in the relevant area, covering the relevant economic sector in its entirety, such as a sectorial ombudsman, should be empowered to take on such procedures. ADR entities sometimes choose to deviate from strict legal provisions in order to base their decisions on equity principles. This implies that ADR entities could opt for solutions that, in their judgment, align with a sense of what is morally or ethically right in a particular situation, diverging from a strict adherence to legal statutes. However, the use of fairness principles should not be acceptable when it comes to unfair commercial practices, which are not subject to compromises or mediated outcomes as they touch upon public order and the fundamentals of consumer protection. [Am. 20]

Added:(16b) The means used by consumer organisations and business associations to make the Commission’s list of ADR entities publicly available can include relevant broadcasts concerning consumer protection and consumer rights. [Am. 21]

Added:(17) To ensure that consumers are able to easily find a suitable ADR entity, especially in a cross-border context, the Commission should develop and maintain a digital interactive tool that provides information about ADR entities’ main characteristics, practical information about how to avail of ADR procedures in a cross-border context and links to the webpages of the ADR entities, as notified to it, allowing consumers to be directed to a competent body to resolve their disputes. The Commission should ensure coordination between this digital interactive tool and other EU and national digital tools, where appropriate. [Am. 22]

Added:(18) Therefore, Directive 2013/11/EU should be amended accordingly.

Added:(19) As Regulation (EU) No 524/2013 is to be repealed by a separate act, it is also necessary to amend Directives (EU) 2015/2302, (EU) 2019/2161 and (EU) 2020/1828 of the European Parliament and of the Council, as a consequence of that repeal,

Added:HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:

Added:Article 1 Amendments to Directive 2013/11/EU

Added:Directive 2013/11/EU is amended as follows:

Added:-1. Article 1 is replaced by the following:

Added:‘Article 1 Subject matter

Added:The purpose of this Directive is, through the achievement of a high level of consumer protection, to contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market by ensuring that consumers can, on a voluntary basis, submit complaints against traders to entities offering independent, impartial, transparent, effective, fast and fair alternative dispute resolution procedures.

Added:The participation of air carriers falling under the scope of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 in ADR procedures shall be mandatory, without prejudice to the right of parties to access the judicial system.

Added:This Directive is without prejudice to national legislation making participation in such procedures mandatory in economic sectors other than those referred to in the second subparagraph, provided that such legislation does not prevent the parties from exercising their right of access to the judicial system.’. [Am. 23]

Added:1. In Article 2, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

Added:‘1. This Directive shall apply to procedures for the out-of-court resolution of disputes between consumers resident in the Union and a traders offering goods or services, including digital content and digital services, to those consumers, through the intervention of an ADR entity which proposes or imposes a solution or brings the parties together with the aim of facilitating an amicable solution concerning one of the following:

Added:(a) contractual obligations stemming from sales contracts, including for the supply of digital content, or service contracts, including pre-contractual and post-contractual obligations and in particular in relation to:

Added:(i) unfair commercial practices and terms;

Added:(ii) compulsory pre-contractual information;

Added:(iii) passenger and travellers’ rights;

Added:(iv) remedies in the event of non-conformity of products and digital content; and

Added:(v) access to deliveries; [Am. 24]