EU draft direc­ti­ve on due dili­gence in the sup­p­ly chain – stay alert!

In June 2021, the Ger­man Bun­des­tag pas­sed the Sup­p­ly Chain Due Dili­gence Act (“LkSG” or the “Ger­man Due Dili­gence Act”), which will come into force on 1 Janu­ary 2023.

After repea­ted­ly post­po­ning the dead­line for a pro­po­sed direc­ti­ve on cor­po­ra­te accoun­ta­bi­li­ty and due dili­gence, the Euro­pean Com­mis­si­on now published the draft direc­ti­ve on cor­po­ra­te due dili­gence for sus­taina­bi­li­ty  (“Draft Direc­ti­ve”) (PDF) on 23 Febru­ary 2022. The con­se­quen­ces of the Euro­pean deve­lo­p­ment for the com­pa­nies affec­ted in accordance with the Ger­man Due Dili­gence Act depend not only on whe­ther and with what con­tent the direc­ti­ve actual­ly enters into force, but also on whe­ther and to what ext­ent it will go bey­ond the requi­re­ments of the natio­nal law.

What’s in store for companies?

At first glan­ce, the con­tents of the Ger­man Due Dili­gence Act and the draft direc­ti­ve are simi­lar. On clo­ser inspec­tion, howe­ver, it beco­mes appa­rent that the draft direc­ti­ve pro­vi­des for signi­fi­cant­ly more strin­gent regu­la­ti­ons in some are­as. This is becau­se it not only increa­ses the group of com­pa­nies affec­ted, but also the scope of the (due dili­gence) obli­ga­ti­ons to be com­pli­ed with.

This fol­lows if only from the enlar­ged (per­so­nal) scope of the draft direc­ti­ve, which requi­res com­pli­ance from com­pa­nies with more than 250 employees, whe­re­as the Ger­man Due Dili­gence Act curr­ent­ly only encom­pas­ses com­pa­nies with at least 3,000 employees.

In addi­ti­on, the draft direc­ti­ve (in con­trast to the Ger­man Due Dili­gence Act) requi­res affec­ted com­pa­nies to com­ply with due dili­gence obli­ga­ti­ons not only through the “sup­p­ly chain”, but through the “added value chain”. The term sup­p­ly chain essen­ti­al­ly refers to the actions of the com­pa­ny its­elf as well as its (in)direct sup­pli­ers who­se actions are “neces­sa­ry” for the manu­fac­tu­re of the pro­ducts. Fur­ther­mo­re, the con­cept of added value chain includes all acti­vi­ties “rela­ted” to the pro­duc­tion of the pro­ducts, i.e. not only upstream, but any busi­ness rela­ti­onships (whe­ther upstream or downstream).

More exten­si­ve due dili­gence obli­ga­ti­ons based on the draft direc­ti­ve are also noti­ceable in the mea­su­res that com­pa­nies must take to pre­vent or stop any vio­la­ti­on of human rights and the envi­ron­ment. In accordance with Artic­le 7 of the draft direc­ti­ve, com­pa­nies must install con­cre­te pre­ven­ti­ve mea­su­res for this pur­po­se. In this con­text, affec­ted com­pa­nies may be requi­red not to enter into (new) busi­ness rela­ti­onships or to ter­mi­na­te exis­ting busi­ness ones. Whe­re­as in accordance with § 7(3) of the Ger­man Due Dili­gence Act, the “ter­mi­na­ti­on” of a busi­ness rela­ti­onship may only be con­side­red in the event of a serious vio­la­ti­on of the pro­tec­ted inte­rests, affec­ted com­pa­nies will pro­ba­b­ly have to review their busi­ness rela­ti­onships much ear­lier in the future and adjust or ter­mi­na­te them if necessary.

In addi­ti­on, the Ger­man Due Dili­gence Act does not direct­ly impo­se climate-protection requi­re­ments on com­pa­nies, while the draft direc­ti­ve expli­cit­ly addres­ses cli­ma­te chan­ge miti­ga­ti­on as well. In accordance with Artic­le 15 of the draft direc­ti­ve, com­pa­nies must adopt a plan that ensu­res the com­pa­ti­bi­li­ty of their busi­ness model with the 1.5 degree tar­get. Accor­din­gly, in the future, com­pa­nies will also have to pay more atten­ti­on to climate-friendly struc­tu­ring of their busi­ness acti­vi­ties and, in some cases, obli­ga­te their con­trac­tu­al part­ners accordingly.

The draft direc­ti­ve also goes one step fur­ther than the Ger­man Due Dili­gence Act in estab­li­shing (addi­tio­nal) civil lia­bi­li­ty. This is becau­se, while § 3(3) of the Ger­man Due Dili­gence Act express­ly rejects such a pro­vi­si­on, Artic­le 22 of the draft direc­ti­ve requi­res com­pa­nies to ensu­re civil lia­bi­li­ty in the event of cer­tain violations.


Com­pa­nies should con­ti­nue to moni­tor legal deve­lo­p­ments clo­se­ly, with sup­port if neces­sa­ry. In par­ti­cu­lar, they should review whe­ther the (trans­po­si­ti­on) laws app­ly to them and how they might (re)structure their busi­ness rela­ti­onships and con­trac­tu­al land­scape to ensu­re com­pli­ance with the obli­ga­ti­ons that app­ly to them.

It remains to be seen whe­ther and with what con­tent the direc­ti­ve will actual­ly enter into force. Howe­ver, if it is adopted with the pro­po­sed con­tent, Ger­man legis­la­tors would have to tigh­ten up the Ger­man Due Dili­gence Act and the com­pa­nies affec­ted would have to (re)consider and con­trac­tual­ly secu­re the mea­su­res and struc­tures they have imple­men­ted to date.


Stay up-to-date

We use your email address exclusively for sending our newsletter. You have the right to revoke your consent at any time with effect for the future. For further information, please refer to our privacy policy.