Activities of Sergey LAGODINSKY related to 2023/0202(COD)
Reports (1)
REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down additional procedural rules relating to the enforcement of Regulation (EU) 2016/679
Legal basis opinions (0)
Amendments (55)
Amendment 85 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) In order to provide for the smooth and effective functioning of the cooperation and dispute resolution mechanism provided for in Articles 60 and 65 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, it is necessary to lay down rules concerning the conduct of proceedings by the supervisory authorities in cross-border cases, and by the Board during dispute resolution, including the handling of cross-border complaints. It is also necessary for this reason to lay down rules concerning the exercise of the right to be heard by the parties under investigation prior to the adoption of decisions by supervisory authorities and, as the case may be, by the Board. This Regulation thereby aims at protecting the right to good administration as enshrined in Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’). To achieve this objective, when applying provisions of this Regulation, all data protection authorities should act in an impartial and independent manner and in accordance with the rule of law, as enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union.
Amendment 86 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) This Regulation and Chapter VII of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 only govern certain elements of the cooperation procedure, when supervisory authorities of more than one Member State participate in the procedure. This Regulation does not apply when a party lodges a complaint directly with a lead supervisory authority in another Member State.
Amendment 88 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 b (new)
Recital 2 b (new)
(2b) The procedural law of each Member State should apply to the supervisory authorities insofar as this Regulation does not harmonise a matter. In line with the primacy of Union law, supervisory authorities should not apply national procedural law where it is in conflict with this Regulation and Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Cooperation among supervisory authorities should not be limited because of differences in national procedural law.
Amendment 91 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Supervisory authorities are obliged to decide on complaints within a reasonable timeframe. What is a reasonable timeframe depends on the circumstances of each case and, in particular, its context, the various procedural steps followed by the lead supervisory authority, the conduct of the parties in the course of the procedure and the complexity of the case. Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and Articles 41 and 47 of the Charter require a reasonable overall duration of procedures. Given that this includes judicial remedies under Article 78 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, procedures before supervisory authorities should typically not take more than nine months, unless exceptional circumstances arise. This Regulation foresees prolongations for delays or disruptions that are outside of the control of the lead supervisory authority.
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) The direct interaction between Member States’ supervisory authorities and the parties is governed by national procedural law, insofar as Regulation (EU) 2016/679, this Regulation or Union law do not take primacy. In the case of indirect interaction of a lead supervisory authority with a party via another supervisory authority, the latter authority’s procedural law should apply to any direct interaction with the party. In line with Article 56(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, a complainant has the right to solely communicate with the supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged. This does not prevent the complainant to directly communicate with another supervisory authority, including the lead supervisory authority, which may be more efficient.
Amendment 93 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 b (new)
Recital 5 b (new)
(5b) Article 6 of the ECHR and Article 47 of the Charter require that fair procedures are public. Article 42 of the Charter and the law of many Member States foresee the right of access to public documents and the transparency of actions of authorities. However, it should be possible to apply, in accordance with national procedural law applicable to the supervisory authority that the party directly interacts with, strictly necessary and proportionate limitations in relation to the disclosure or the further use of legally protected information, such as personal data or trade secrets protected under Directive (EU) 2016/943. This could include the internal deliberations and decision-making of the authority. The least intrusive measures, such as limitation of the use of information or blackening of information should be applied. Parties should always be informed that information was withheld from them, and why.
Amendment 94 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 c (new)
Recital 5 c (new)
(5c) The lead supervisory authority manages the case in line with this Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and its national procedural law, while fully cooperating with other supervisory authorities. Other supervisory authorities should provide any relevant information and their views to the lead supervisory authority. The lead supervisory authority should structure the case in an efficient and expedient way taking full account of the views of other supervisory authorities.
Amendment 95 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 d (new)
Recital 5 d (new)
(5d) Supervisory authorities may also start additional procedures, for example in the case of systemic or repetitive infringements. This should however, not lead to any interference with the rights of the parties. Complaints procedures should not be delayed and the right of parties to be heard should not be limited when a supervisory authority opens an ex officio procedure into the same matter.
Amendment 96 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 e (new)
Recital 5 e (new)
(5e) Each supervisory authority should define one or more languages that it accepts for incoming information by other supervisory authorities. An additional joint “cooperation language” should be defined which all supervisory authorities must accept for incoming or outgoing information. In case of judicial remedies, the supervisory authority against which a judicial remedy is brought should have the duty to translate all relevant documents to the accepted languages.
Amendment 97 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Each complaint handled by a supervisory authority pursuant to Article 57(1), point (f), of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 is to be investigated with all due diligence to the extent appropriate bearing in mind that every use of powers by the supervisory authority must be appropriate, necessary and proportionate in view of ensuring compliance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679. It falls within the discretion of each competent authority to decide the extent to which a complaint should be investigated. While assessing the extent appropriate of an investigation, supervisory authorities should aim to deliver a satisfactory resolution to the complainant, which may not necessarily require exhaustivelyrequires investigating all possiblerelevant legal and factual elements arising from the complaint, but which provides an effective and quick remedy to the complainant. The assessment of the extent of the investigative measures required could be informed by the gravity of the alleged infringement, its systemic or repetitive nature,to ensure that a decision can be jointly taken and an effective and quick remedy to the complainant can be quickly delivered. Planning the procedure is important to ensure a quick result. Supervisory authorities should not refer to the rights under Article 79 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 as a reason to limit the investigation of a complaint. To ensure compliance with Article 47 orf the fact, as the case may be, that the complainant also took advantage of her or his rights under Article 79 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679Charter, the handling of a complain should always lead to an appealable decision. Unless a complaint is withdrawn, it should not be possible for complaints to be closed or otherwise terminated without a decision.
Amendment 100 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) In order for supervisory authorities to bring a swift end to infringements of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and to deliver a quick resolution for complainants, supervisory authorities should be able to endeavour, where appropriate, to resolve complaints by amicable settlement between the parties. Supervisory authorities should not make the handling of a complaint contingent on participation in an amicable settlement process. Settlements should be able to take the form of a contract between the parties under applicable law, but should bind the authorities. The fact that an individual complaint has been resolved through an amicable settlement does not prevent the competent supervisory authority from pursuing an ex officio case, for example in the case of systemic or repetitive infringements of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 104 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) To enable the complainant to exercise her or his right to an effective judicial remedy under Article 78 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, the supervisory authority fully or partially rejecting ahandling of any complaint should do so by means ofalways lead to a decision which may be challenged before a national court.
Amendment 110 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) When setting deadlines for parties under investigation and complainantand limiting the length of submissions for parties to provide their views on preliminary findings, supervisory authorities should have regard to the complexity of the issues raised in preliminary findings, in order to ensure that the parties under investigation and complainants have sufficient opportunity to meaningfully provide their views on the issues raised. This should however not lead to undue long procedures.
Amendment 112 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – title
Article 1 – title
Subject matter and scope
Amendment 113 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Regulation lays down procedural rules for the handling of complaints and the conduct of investigations in complaint- based and ex officio cases by supervisory authorities inrelated to the cross-border enforcementprocessing in the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
This Regulation applies to cases under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 related to such cross-border processing, whenever supervisory authorities of more than one Member State are taking part in the case, as well as related judicial remedies.
Amendment 115 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 26c of this Regulation also applies to cases before a supervisory authority of a single Member State.
Amendment 116 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 c (new)
This Regulation does not preclude Member States from specifying procedural matters not regulated by this Regulation or Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 125 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
A complaint may be resolved by amicable settlement between the complainant and the parties under investigation. Where the supervisory authority considers that an amicable settlement to the complaint has been found, it shall communicate the proposed settlement to the complainant. If the complainant does not object to the amicable settlement proposed by the supervisory authority within one month, the complaint shall be deemed withdrawnonly where it concerns the data subjects’ rights and where with the resolution of the dispute by an amicable settlement, the processing which the complaint related to is no longer taking place.
Amendment 129 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
An amicable settlement between the complainant and the party under investigation shall be considered to be found where there is explicit agreement. The supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged may facilitate such an amicable settlement in the preparatory phase; the lead supervisory authority may facilitate it once a complaint has been transmitted to it. Where an amicable settlement to the complaint has been found, the parties shall communicate the settlement to the supervisory authority, and . the complaint shall be deemed withdrawn.
Amendment 131 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 b (new)
The supervisory authority is not bound by the amicable settlement. It shall in particular open an ex officio investigation instead, where (a) the party under investigation is a repeat offender, (b) the party under investigation has been the subject of a large number of other amicable settlements, (c) the broad subject matter of the complaint concerns a large number of data subjects other than the complainant; or (d) the consequence of the processing which has been subject to the complaint is of long duration or serious nature.
Amendment 132 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5a Request for an ex officio procedure 1. The lead supervisory authority may open an ex officio procedure at any time. 2. Where it considers that Regulation (EU) 2016/679 may be violated, any concerned supervisory authority may request an ex officio procedure by submitting a written request to the lead supervisory authority. Such a request shall contain at least: (a) a declaration to be a concerned supervisory authority; (b) any evidence of the violation; (c) a summary of key issues pursuant to Article 9; 3. Within three weeks, the assumed lead supervisory authority shall: (a) inform the concerned supervisory authority that it has opened an ex officio procedure.; (b) inform the concerned supervisory authority that Article 56(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 applies to the case and that in accordance with Article 56(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 the lead supervisory authority does not intend to handle the case itself in line; or (c) reject the request, if it takes the view that it is not the lead supervisory authority or there is no violation of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In the case referred to in point (a) of this paragraph, the concerned supervisory authority may submit to the lead supervisory authority a draft decision pursuant to Article 56(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In the case referred to in point (c) of this paragraph, the concerned supervisory authority may resubmit an amended request for an ex officio procedure, or request a determination on the opening of the procedure by the Board under Article 26a(1).
Amendment 178 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – title
Article 22 – title
Referral to dispute resolution under Article 65(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679
Amendment 179 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 1
1. If the lead supervisory authority does not follow the relevant and reasoned objections or is of the opinion that the objections are not relevant or reasoned, it shall submit the subject-matter to the dispute resolution mechanism set out in Article 65 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, within four weeks from the receipt of all relevant and reasoned objections.
Amendment 180 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) the summary of key issues;
Amendment 181 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) a summary of the relevant facts, including the description of processing activities, the description of the company's organisation and the description of where decisions are taken;
Amendment 182 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point f
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point f
(f) the relevant and reasoned objections which were not followed by the lead supervisory authority , and the objections that the lead supervisory authority has rejected as being neither relevant nor reasoned ;
Amendment 183 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point g
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point g
(g) the reasons on the basis of which the lead supervisory authority did not follow the relevant and reasoned objections or considered the objections not to be relevant or reasoned.
Amendment 184 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
(ga) access to the joint case file.
Amendment 185 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3
Article 22 – paragraph 3
3. The Board shall within four weeks of receiving the documents listed in paragraph 2 identify retained relevant and reasoned objectionregister the submission of a subject-matter to the dispute resolution mechanism within two weeks of receiving the documents listed in paragraph 2 or it shall demand a resubmission that includes any missing information within another week. When registering the submission, the Board shall list and structure the disputes between supervisory authorities which form the scope of the procedure before the Board, and instantly provide them to the supervisory authorities..
Amendment 186 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The supervisory authorities concerned may, within two weeks after having been provided with the submission pursuant to paragraph 3, submit any relevant information that they have on that case, including but not limited to, facts and documentation that underlie their objection.
Amendment 187 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. The “referral of the subject- matter” pursuant to Article 65(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall mean the moment when all of the documents referred to in Article 2(2) are available and translated.[A1] Justification: EDPB para 101.
Amendment 188 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 c (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. The prohibition provided for in Article 65(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 for supervisory authorities to adopt a decision on the subject matter submitted to the Board during the periods referred to in Article 65(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 65(3) of that Regulation shall also apply during the periods referred in paragraph 3 of this Article.
Amendment 190 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 a (new)
Article 26 a (new)
Article 26a Right to an effective judicial remedy against a supervisory authority 1. Without prejudice to existing remedies under Article 78 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and any other administrative or non-judicial remedy, each party to the procedure shall have the right to an effective judicial remedy: (a) where the supervisory authority with which the complaint has been lodged does not use its powers to ensure that another supervisory authority progresses the procedure; (b) where a lead supervisory authority does not comply with deadlines as provided for in Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and this Regulation; or (c) where a supervisory authority does not comply with a binding decision of the Board. 2. Any party to the procedure or a not-for- profit body under Article 80(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 may bring an action under paragraph 1, point (c) independently of an infringement of the rights of a data subject.
Amendment 195 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 a (new)
Article 30 a (new)
Article 30a Evaluation and review The Commission shall evaluate and review this Regulation as part of its reports to the European Parliament and to the Council under Article 97 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 196 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – title
Article 31 – title
Entry into force and application
Amendment 197 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 1 a (new)
It shall apply from … [one year from the date of entry into force of this Regulation].
Amendment 221 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2 a) Supervisory authorities shall make use of all options under applicable national law to allow parties in another Member State to participate in procedures. This may include remote video participation, interpreters or generally available means of communication. (To be added behind Recital 2b(new) as Recital 2c(new).)
Amendment 237 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Cases that do not raise contentious issues do not require extensive discussion between supervisory authorities in order to reach a consensus and could, therefore, be dealt with more quickly. When none of the supervisory authorities concerned raise comments on the summary of key issues, the lead supervisory authority should communicate the preliminary findings provided for in Article 14 within nine months.draft decision within three months after the deadline for comments. (This replaces amendment 19.)
Amendment 262 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 294 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. A complaint may be resolved by amicable settlement between the complainant and the parties under investigation. Where the supervisory authority considers that an amicable settlement to the complaint has been found, it shall communicate the proposed settlement to the complainant. If the complainant does not object to the amicable settlement proposed by the supervisory authority within one month, the complaint shall be deemed withdrawn.. The supervisory authorities may facilitate such a voluntary process. (This replaces amendment 111.)
Amendment 305 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5a Request for an ex officio procedure 1. The lead supervisory authority may open an ex officio procedure at any time. 2. Where it considers that Regulation (EU) 2016/679 may be violated, any concerned supervisory authority may request an ex officio procedure by submitting a written request to the lead supervisory authority. Such a request shall contain at least: (a) a declaration to be a concerned supervisory authority; (b) any evidence of the violation; (c) a summary of key issues pursuant to Article 9; 3. Within three weeks, the assumed lead supervisory authority shall: (a) inform the concerned supervisory authority that it has opened an ex officio procedure; (b) inform the concerned supervisory authority that Article 56(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 applies to the case and that in accordance with Article 56(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 the lead supervisory authority does not intend to handle the case itself in line; or (c) reject the request, if it takes the view that it is not the lead supervisory authority or there is no violation of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In the case referred to in point (a) of this paragraph, the concerned supervisory authority may submit to the lead supervisory authority a draft decision pursuant to Article 56(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In the case referred to in point (c) of this paragraph, the concerned supervisory authority may resubmit an amended request for an ex officio procedure, or request a determination on the opening of the procedure by the Board under Article 26a(1). 4. Where the lead supervisory authority opens an ex officio procedure, it shall deliver a draft decision pursuant to Article 60(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 without delay, but not later than nine months from the receipt of the complaint. This period may exceptionally be prolonged by: (a) eight weeks when comments under Article 9(3) are submitted against a summary of key issues or an updated summary of key issues; (b) the period of time between a reference under Article 26a and the decision by the Board; (c) the period of any prolongation permitted by the Board under Article 26a(3). (This replaces amendment 114.)
Amendment 311 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Supervisory authorities shall strive to communicate the information obtained in the context of the procedures set out in this Regulation to national and Union supervisory authorities competent in data protection and other areas, including competition, financial services, energy, telecommunications and consumer protection authorities, where the information is deemed relevant to the tasks and duties of those authorities. (This replaces amendment 117.)
Amendment 313 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. The lead supervisory authority shall regularly updatprovide the other supervisory authorities concerned about the investigation and provide the other supervisory authorities concerned, at the earliest convenience, with all relevant information once available.with instant, unrestricted and continuous remote access to the full joint case file, and shall include into the joint case file any documents, submissions, communication, protocols, evidence or other information related to the case within one week of producing or receiving it. (This replaces amendment 119.)
Amendment 316 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Relevant information within the meaning of Article 60(1) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shallThe lead supervisory authority shall actively provide and notify the other supervisory authorities concerned with relevant information within the meaning of Article 60(1) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, within one week from receiving or producing it. This information shall cover information on major steps in the procedure, include,ing where applicable: (This replaces amendment 120.)
Amendment 322 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) identification ofpreliminary complex legal and technological assessments which are relevant for preliminary orientation of their assessment;; (This replaces amendment 135.)
Amendment 325 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. The summary of key issues shall be updated by the lead supervisory authority without undue delay to reflect any factual or legal changes that emerge during the course of the procedure. (This replaces amendment 137.)
Amendment 327 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. The supervisory authorities concerned may provide factual or legal comments on the summary of key issues. Such comments must be provided within four weeks of receipt of the summary of key issues. or any update. (This replaces amendment 139.)
Amendment 332 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 6
Article 9 – paragraph 6
6. Cases where none of the supervisory authorities concerned provided comments under paragraph 3 of this Article, and where the supervisory authority indicates that it intends to follow European case law, as well as guidelines, recommendations and best practices referred to in paragraph 2(ca), shall be considered non-contentious cases. In such cases, the preliminary findingsterm to issue a draft decision referred to in Article 14(1b) shall be communicated to the parties under investigation within 9 months of the expiry of the deadline provided for in paragraph 3 of this Article.reduced to 3 months. (This replaces amendment 141.)
Amendment 340 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. TIn cases not falling under Article 9(6) of this Regulation, the lead supervisory authority shall engage with the supervisory authorities concerned on the basis of their comments on the summary of key issues, and, where applicable, in response to requests under Article 61 and 62 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in an endeavour to reach a consensus. The consensus shall be used as a basis for the lead supervisory authority to continue the investigation and draft the preliminary findings or, where applicable, provide the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged with its reasoning for the purposes of Article 11(2).
Amendment 345 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. Where, in a complaint-based within four weeks after the expiry of the deadlinvestigation for comments, there is no consensus between the lead supervisory authority and one or more concerned supervisory authorities on the matters referred to in Article 9(2), point (b), of this Regulation, the lead supervisory authority shall request an urgent binding decision of the Board under Article 66(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In that case, the conditions for requesting an urgent binding decision under Article 66(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall be presumed to be met.the lead supervisory authority or a concerned supervisory authority may request a procedural determination pursuant to Article 26a(1). (This replaces amendment 144.)
Amendment 350 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. When requesting an urgent binding decision of the Board pursuant to paragraph 4 of this Article, the lead procedural determination pursuant to Article 26a(1), the requesting supervisory authority shall provide all of the following: (This replaces amendment 145.)
Amendment 357 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6
Article 10 – paragraph 6
6. The Board shall adopt an urgent binding decision on the scope of the investigation on the basis of the comments of the supervisory authorities concerned and the position of the lead supervisory authority on those comments.ummary of key issues, in accordance with Article 26a, on the basis of all documents received. (This replaces amendment 148.)
Amendment 447 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 a (new)
Article 28 a (new)
Article 28a Remedies against procedural determinations Remedies against procedural determinations by a supervisory authority under national law may only be brought together with the remedy against the final material decision. Deadlines for remedies against procedural determinations under applicable national law are prolonged for the duration of the procedure before the supervisory authority. (To be added as Article 28b.)
Amendment 450 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 b (new)
Article 28 b (new)