LEGAL NEWS IN THE SPOTLIGHT | The CJEU on national measures restricting freedom to provide information society services

On 16 June 2026, the CJEU (Grand Chamber) issued its judgment in joined cases C-188/24 and C-190/24 (WebGroup Czech Republic and NKL Associates v. Ministre de la Culture; Coyote System v. Ministre de l’Intérieur), concerning the interpretation of Directive 2000/31/EC (“E-Commerce Directive”) in relation to two French legislative measures: one requiring providers of online pornographic content, including those established in other Member States, to implement age verification systems to prevent minors from accessing such content; and one empowering the administrative authority to order operators of geolocation-based navigation services, including those established in other Member States, to refrain from rebroadcasting users’ reports indicating the location of certain road controls (collectively, the “National Rules”). The CJEU ruled that the National Rules (a) fall within the “coordinated field” of the E-Commerce Directive, (b) constitute restrictions on the free movement of information society services, but (c) may nonetheless be compatible with EU law subject to compliance with the conditions set out in Article 3(4) of the E-Commerce Directive, including the following: (i) the measures adopted by French authorities based on the National Rules must be directed at a given information society service and not be of a general and abstract nature; (ii) they must be proportionate to the objectives pursued; and (iii) the procedural notification requirements under Article 3(4)(b) of the E-Commerce Directive must be complied with, including a prior unsuccessful request to the Member State of establishment and prior notification to the EU Commission and that Member State, save in cases of urgency under Article 3(5).

On a separate issue, the CJEU further held that, in certain circumstances, the algorithm used by a hosting provider may imply that the latter plays an “active role” preventing it from benefiting from the safe harbour set forth by Article 14 of the E-commerce Directive. This is the case where, as noted by Advocate General Szpunar in its Opinion (para. 231-239), the algorithm does not merely store and disseminate information provided by users, but also evaluates and selects such information so as to generate a new output in which the original user-uploaded information is no longer identifiable.

Newsletter n. 119 – June 2026