What the proposal provides for
The European Commission proposed the Digital Fairness Act (COM(2026) 1100) on November 11, 2026, a regulation repealing Directive 2005/29/EC. According to Agenda Digitale's analysis, the text addresses the case in which an automated shopping assistant, including one based on artificial intelligence, buys on behalf of the consumer. The obligations fall on the trader that makes the system available, i.e. the platform: upon first activation, it must expressly require the consumer to choose whether to confirm every contract, only those identified by criteria such as a maximum price and the duration of the choice, or to waive any prior confirmation. The choice can be changed at any time and must be confirmed on a durable medium.
Article 3, point 21, defines an automated system as software capable of performing actions and taking decisions with legal effects, including the conclusion of contracts, without human intervention; recital 77 specifies that human oversight does not remove this nature.
The crux of spending beyond the limit
The critical point concerns the scenario in which the software exceeds the parameters it has received. The regulation is silent on the fate of the purchase: Article 2(2) refers the matter to national contract law. In Italy, Agenda Digitale notes, the power of representation derives from law or from the person concerned (Article 1387 of the Civil Code), and a contract concluded within the limits binds the represented person (Article 1388); Article 1398 places on the party that exceeded the limits liability for the damage suffered by the third party who relied without fault.
These rules presuppose a human representative with assets from which the third party can be compensated: software has no such assets, and the text does not clarify whether the assistant's provider is liable. The same assistant sold in twenty-seven States may therefore have different outcomes, even though recital 77 states the objective of legal certainty and predictability also in cross-border transactions.
Information, withdrawal and conflicts of interest
The amount of pre-contractual information depends on the choice: those who opt for confirmation receive, before the decision, the data indicated in Article 26(4)(a), in legible form; those who waive confirmation lose this advance reading. Recital 78 nevertheless specifies that use of the assistant does not entail waiving the rights under Directive 2011/83/EU, including withdrawal, for which Article 24 requires an online function available for the entire duration of the period.
In one case only is confirmation also imposed on those who had chosen full autonomy: if the assistant's provider receives a payment to propose a contract or has a conflict of interest with the trader, it must disclose this and request confirmation (Article 26(4)(b)). The proposal does not define conflict of interest, and the scope of the clause will be determined by those applying the text.
The seller, for its part, does not necessarily receive the limits of the delegation: Article 26(7) requires transmitting the consumer's contact details, not the maximum price. Paragraphs 5 and 6 provide for identification via digital wallets as an option, without obligation. The proposal awaits negotiation between Parliament and Council and would apply twelve months after entry into force (Article 40(2)).
