Regulations •

Right to Repair: national transposition status and what actually applies

Directive (EU) 2024/1799 applied from 31 July 2026 - but only where it was transposed. Germany's Reparaturgesetz, the state of play in Poland, Spain, Italy and the Netherlands, and what legally binds a manufacturer in a market whose government missed the deadline.

Author: myDPP Team

Right to Repair: national transposition status and what actually applies

The transposition deadline for Directive (EU) 2024/1799 expired on 31 July 2026, and the shorthand that followed — “the right to repair now applies across the EU” — is only half true. A directive does not apply by itself. It obliges 27 governments to each pass their own law, and six weeks after the deadline most of them have not finished. The practical consequence for a manufacturer is awkward: the same dishwasher now triggers an enforceable repair claim in one member state and none at all in the market next door.

This article sets out where transposition actually stands, using Germany as the worked example of a finished implementation, and then answers the question most overviews skip — what binds you in a market whose legislature let the deadline pass. For what the directive requires in substance, see our overview of the Right to Repair Directive; the link to the Digital Product Passport comes at the end.

Key takeaways

  • Germany transposed on time — barely. The Reparaturgesetz was adopted by the Bundestag on 25 June 2026, approved by the Bundesrat, published in the Federal Law Gazette and has applied since 31 July 2026.
  • Its core is a new subtitle in the German Civil Code, sections 479a to 479g BGB, giving consumers a claim directly against the manufacturer, with no contract and no retailer in between, outside the warranty period.
  • The repair obligation is retroactive in effect. It attaches to the product-specific availability period — typically seven years for smartphones and ten for large household appliances, counted from the date the model was withdrawn from the market — not to the date of sale.
  • Poland, Spain, Italy and the Netherlands all missed the deadline. Bills are moving, but as of 8 September 2026 none of the four has an implementing law in force.
  • Where a state has not transposed, the directive has no horizontal direct effect: a consumer cannot sue a manufacturer on Article 5 alone. Reading that as “no action needed” is a mistake — the obligation arrives later and captures goods sold today.
  • The directive is fully harmonising. Member States may not be stricter or more lenient except where the text expressly allows it, so national divergence is limited to timing, penalties and repair-promotion schemes.
  • For product data the conclusion is blunt: spare part availability, repair instructions, indicative prices and repairability parameters are now publishable product data — the same fields that later become passport fields.

Why the national law, not the directive, defines your obligations

The distinction between a regulation and a directive matters here. A regulation such as the PPWR or the ESPR applies directly and identically in every member state on its date of application. A directive is addressed to the member states and only reaches companies through the national law that implements it.

Directive (EU) 2024/1799 was adopted on 13 June 2024, published in the Official Journal on 10 July 2024 and entered into force on 31 July 2024. The transposition deadline fell two years later, on 31 July 2026. Since then the single market has split in two on this question: states with a repair law in force, and states where the bill is still in committee.

One structural feature limits how far those national laws can diverge. The directive takes a full harmonisation approach: within its scope, member states may not provide for higher or lower consumer protection unless the directive expressly permits it. So the substantive duties are the same everywhere. What differs is when they start, how they are enforced, and which promotion measures accompany them.

Germany: the Reparaturgesetz and the new sections 479a ff. BGB

The timing was tight. The Federal Ministry of Justice published a ministerial draft in January 2026, the government bill followed in March 2026, the Bundestag held its first reading on 20 May 2026, the Committee on Legal Affairs and Consumer Protection reported on 24 June 2026, and the Bundestag adopted the amended text on 25 June 2026 — five weeks before the deadline.

A claim directly against the manufacturer

The central change sits in the new sections 479a to 479g BGB. They form a separate subtitle and create a consumer claim against the manufacturer that is independent of any contract of sale. That is a notable shift in a legal system where sales-law remedies ran against the seller and the manufacturer was reachable only through a commercial guarantee or product liability.

In practice:

  • The consumer can demand repair from the manufacturer directly, even for an appliance bought years ago from a retailer that has since closed.
  • The claim exists outside the warranty period, that is, after the two-year limitation period for conformity claims has run out.
  • Where the manufacturer is not established in the Union, the authorised representative steps in, failing that the importer, failing that the distributor — the same cascade used by the GPSR and the market surveillance regulation.
  • Repair must be provided within a reasonable time and for a reasonable price. Neither is quantified; the benchmark is the ratio of repair cost to replacement cost and prevailing market practice.
  • The manufacturer must publish indicative prices for typical repairs on a freely accessible website. Those prices are not binding, but they must be realistic — a deterrent figure does not discharge the duty.

Repairability becomes part of conformity

Section 434(3) BGB now counts repairability among the objective requirements for conformity. That sounds procedural but shifts the practical burden: a product that cannot be opened without destroying it may be non-conforming for that reason alone. Practitioners have criticised the fact that the term itself is left undefined, leaving the content to the courts and to the ecodesign repairability requirements.

Twelve extra months of liability when repair is chosen

The directive also amends the Sale of Goods Directive (EU) 2019/771. Where the consumer chooses repair rather than replacement as the remedy for non-conformity, the liability period is extended by twelve months. The seller must inform the consumer of that choice and its consequence. Omitting the notice invites unfair-commercial-practice claims and, in a dispute, the extension is likely to be applied anyway.

The European Repair Information Form

The form standardised in Annex I of the directive is anchored in the Introductory Act to the German Civil Code. Providing it is voluntary — no repairer is obliged to issue one. A repairer who does issue it is bound by the conditions stated in it — price, nature of the repair, duration, availability of a replacement device — for roughly 30 days, and may not charge for the form itself (diagnostic costs are a separate matter). Its value is comparability: two quotes in the same grid can finally be read against each other.

Which products the repair obligation covers

Article 5 does not cover all goods. It applies to the product groups in Annex II, which cross-refers to the ecodesign repairability requirements that already exist for them:

Product groupNote
Household washing machines and washer-dryerssince 31 Jul 2026
Household dishwasherssince 31 Jul 2026
Refrigerating appliances, including wine storagesince 31 Jul 2026
Electronic displays (televisions, monitors)since 31 Jul 2026
Welding equipmentsince 31 Jul 2026
Vacuum cleanersecodesign repairability requirements still incomplete
Servers and data storage productssince 31 Jul 2026
Mobile phones, smartphones, cordless phones, slate tabletssince 31 Jul 2026
Household tumble dryerssince 31 Jul 2026
Goods with batteries for light means of transport (e-bikes, e-scooters)from 18 February 2027

The list is dynamic. Every new implementing act under the ESPR that sets repairability requirements extends Annex II. If your product group has no ecodesign act yet, watch the Commission working plan rather than the current list.

The availability period is what makes this expensive. The duty does not end at the point of sale; it runs for a product-specific period counted from the date the model was withdrawn from the market — typically seven years for smartphones and ten for many large household appliances. A model discontinued in 2021 can remain repair-obliged well into the 2030s.

What manufacturers may no longer do

Article 6 prohibits contractual, hardware and software obstacles. Specifically, it is unlawful to:

  • refuse repair because the goods were previously repaired by someone else;
  • prevent, contractually or technically, the use of spare parts from independent suppliers, second-hand parts or 3D-printed parts;
  • design software so that a correctly fitted original part is disabled or degraded after replacement, that is, parts pairing;
  • restrict access to spare parts, tools and technical information to authorised partners only;
  • price spare parts at levels that deter repair.

Where transposition stands in the other member states

As of 8 September 2026, six weeks past the deadline:

MarketStatusExpected entry into force
GermanyReparaturgesetz adopted 25 Jun 2026, published in the Federal Law Gazettein force since 31 Jul 2026
PolandUOKiK bill UC154, published on the Government Legislation Centre site on 15 Jun 2026, not yet before the Sejm; adoption by the Council of Ministers planned for Q3 2026open, end of 2026 at the earliest
Spaintransposition bundled with the Empowering Consumers Directive into the planned Ley de Consumo Sostenible; still a preliminary draft, notified under TRIS, public consultation open until 15 Sep 2026open, 2027 likely
Italydraft legislative decree amending the Consumer Code, given preliminary approval by the Council of Ministers on 2 Jul 2026 and sent to the chambers on 9 Jul 2026; final approval and publication in the Gazzetta Ufficiale still pendingopen, autumn 2026
NetherlandsImplementatiewet richtlijn bevordering van reparatie, agreed in the Council of Ministers, advised on by the Council of State and submitted to the Tweede Kamer on 10 Jul 2026end of 2026 expected

The pattern is clear enough: Germany belongs to the small group that delivered, and even there it was close. In the four other markets examined here the bills are moving but not in force.

What applies in a market that has not transposed?

This is the question that matters commercially, and it is frequently answered wrongly. The case law is settled:

No effect between private parties. An untransposed directive cannot impose obligations on a company in favour of a consumer. The Court of Justice held as much in Faccini Dori (C-91/92), where a consumer could not rely on the unimplemented doorstep-selling directive against her counterparty. Applied here: in Italy or Poland a consumer cannot today force the repair of a five-year-old washing machine by invoking Article 5.

Effect against the state. Individuals can rely on sufficiently precise and unconditional provisions of a directive against state bodies (Becker, C-8/81). In this context that touches public procurement and administrative procedure, not the manufacturer–customer relationship.

Conforming interpretation. National courts must interpret existing national law, so far as possible, in the light of the directive (Marleasing, C-106/89). In practice this is the channel through which the directive already bites before transposition — for instance on what counts as a disproportionate remedy under existing sales law.

State liability. Where late transposition causes a consumer loss, a damages claim against the member state may arise (Francovich, C-6/90).

Infringement proceedings. The Commission may act under Article 258 TFEU, and where a member state has failed to notify transposition measures, Article 260(3) TFEU allows financial penalties in the very first judgment. Letters of formal notice typically follow within a few months of the deadline.

For planning purposes this produces an uncomfortable asymmetry. In markets without transposition the obligation is not enforceable today, but it is not avoided. Because the repair duty attaches to a model’s availability period rather than to the date of sale, the future Italian or Polish law will capture the units being sold right now. Building spare-part supply and repair documentation only once the national law arrives means building it retroactively for an installed base — at a materially higher cost.

Timeline to 2029

DateEvent
31 July 2024Directive (EU) 2024/1799 enters into force
25 June 2026Bundestag adopts the German Reparaturgesetz
31 July 2026transposition deadline; German rules apply
18 February 2027goods with batteries for light means of transport fall under Annex II
31 July 2027Commission provides the common interface of the European repair platform
1 January 2028European online platform for repair fully operational
31 July 2029member states notify at least one repair-promotion measure (e.g. a repair voucher)

What this means for product data and the Digital Product Passport

The repair obligation generates data that nobody had to hold in a structured way before. Four blocks are new and permanent:

  1. Spare part master data — part number, mapping to model and production year, availability period, price, lead time. This has to stay consistent for the full availability period, so up to ten years after end of production.
  2. Indicative repair prices — public, versioned, auditable. If prices change, you should be able to show what was published when.
  3. Repair instructions and tool requirements — in the same format as the digital instructions for use that the Machinery Regulation and several ecodesign acts already require.
  4. Repairability parameters — the ones the ESPR lists in Annex I as ecodesign requirements and that later appear as mandatory passport fields.

All four are passport candidates, and that is no accident: promoting repair is an explicit ESPR objective, and the Digital Product Passport is the instrument meant to get the information to the repairer. Modelling repair data properly now does part of the later passport work in advance.

myDPP does not carry out repairs and does not set indicative prices. We store repair data against the product with version history, link it to model and serial number, and serve it through the data carrier — including the record of which version was valid when.

Preparing in five steps

1. Determine exposure market by market

Two questions, not one: is the product in Annex II, and has the target market transposed? The answer is a matrix of product groups against countries, not a single yes or no.

2. Work the availability periods backwards

For every model, record when it was withdrawn from the market and derive the end date of the spare-part and repair duty. This step reliably surfaces models whose parts supply has already lapsed.

3. Publish indicative prices

A freely accessible page listing indicative prices for typical repairs is the most visible duty and the easiest for anyone to check. It should exist per market, in the local language.

4. Review contracts and firmware

Screen dealer and service agreements for clauses that obstruct independent repair. In parallel, check firmware for parts pairing: a software lock triggered by fitting a genuine part is unlawful.

5. Store repair data where product data lives

Spare parts, instructions, indicative prices and repairability parameters belong in the system that already holds product data, not in a PDF on a shared drive. The DPP implementation checklist sets out the structure.

Frequently asked questions (FAQ)

Does the right to repair actually apply now?

In Germany, yes: the implementing act is published and has applied since 31 July 2026. EU-wide, no — the duty exists only in the member states that have transposed, and several large markets have not.

Do I have to repair units sold before 31 July 2026?

Yes. The duty attaches to the model’s availability period, not to the date of sale. For a model discontinued only a few years ago, the obligation applies even though the sale is long past.

What counts as a reasonable price for a repair?

The law does not quantify it. The test is whether the price deters the consumer from repairing. A figure approaching the price of a new unit will generally not discharge the duty.

Must I use the European Repair Information Form?

No, it is voluntary. A repairer who issues one is bound by its terms for about 30 days and may not charge for the form itself.

What happens to a member state that fails to transpose?

The Commission can open infringement proceedings, and where transposition measures were never notified, financial penalties are available in the first judgment. For manufacturers, none of this changes the fact that the obligation arrives with the later national law and then covers goods sold today.

Read more

Sources

Back to Knowledge Base