Digital Fairness Act: Mapping the Expectations

Abstract This paper examines the emerging Digital Fairness Act (DFA) against the development of the EU consumer law safety net, the 2024 Fitness Check and the Consumer Agenda 2030. It explores how EU consumer law should address data-driven commercial practices that leverage digital asymmetries and vulnerabilities without adding to regulatory fragmentation and legal uncertainty. The key challenge is applying technology-neutral consumer rules effectively to modern choice architectures in a way that is sufficiently specific, coherent and, importantly, enforceable. This paper combines doctrinal analysis with insights from anonymised stakeholder discussions held throughout 2025 to outline the key institutional and legislative decisions about the DFA. It also draws on Helberger et al.’s study as a benchmark to assess potential substantive and procedural updates. The paper argues that the value of the DFA largely depends on three factors: its alignment with existing consumer and digital laws, the clarity of definitions such as manipulation, digital asymmetry and contextual vulnerability and, most importantly, the strength of its enforcement mechanisms.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Journal of Risk Regulation
Published
2026-09-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2026.10146
Primary Topic
European and International Contract Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Digital Fairness Act: Mapping the Expectations

Liubomir Nikiforov
European Journal of Risk Regulation
European and International Contract Law
article

Digital Fairness Act: Mapping the Expectations

Liubomir Nikiforov
article en

Abstract

Abstract This paper examines the emerging Digital Fairness Act (DFA) against the development of the EU consumer law safety net, the 2024 Fitness Check and the Consumer Agenda 2030. It explores how EU consumer law should address data-driven commercial practices that leverage digital asymmetries and vulnerabilities without adding to regulatory fragmentation and legal uncertainty. The key challenge is applying technology-neutral consumer rules effectively to modern choice architectures in a way that is sufficiently specific, coherent and, importantly, enforceable. This paper combines doctrinal analysis with insights from anonymised stakeholder discussions held throughout 2025 to outline the key institutional and legislative decisions about the DFA. It also draws on Helberger et al.’s study as a benchmark to assess potential substantive and procedural updates. The paper argues that the value of the DFA largely depends on three factors: its alignment with existing consumer and digital laws, the clarity of definitions such as manipulation, digital asymmetry and contextual vulnerability and, most importantly, the strength of its enforcement mechanisms.

European Journal of Risk Regulation
Victoria University of Bangladesh (BD), Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales du Nord (FR)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
European and International Contract Law
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Digital Fairness Act: Mapping the Expectations — Liubomir Nikiforov · European Journal of Risk Regulation (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS