EU CSDDD (Directive (EU) 2024/1760) Requirements overview

Article 2 sets scope. Article 6 and Article 7 shape how obligations can be performed at group level and how due diligence must be integrated into policies and risk management. This track decides who is responsible and what the program architecture looks like.

Without this track, later measures drift because teams are not using the same entity perimeter or governance model.

Articles 8 and 9 require identification, assessment, and prioritization of actual and potential adverse impacts. The work must use quantitative and qualitative information and should reflect severity and likelihood where not all impacts can be addressed at once.

This is the analytical core of the Directive and the basis for later supplier action and remediation decisions.

Articles 10 to 12 are where the Directive expects visible action. Potential impacts need prevention and mitigation. Actual impacts need corrective action, and in some cases remediation. Contractual assurances are relevant but must be backed by verification and action logic.

This track is where supplier plans, leverage strategy, responsible disengagement, and remediation governance should all connect.

Articles 13 to 17 require stakeholder engagement, a complaints procedure, monitoring, annual communication, and ESAP related publication mechanics. These duties create a public and reviewable interface to the program.

Weakness here often signals that the company built a supplier assessment process but not a full due diligence system.

Article 22 requires the climate transition plan. Articles 23 to 29 create the authorized representative, supervisory authority, penalty, network cooperation, and civil liability architecture around the due diligence duty.

This track tells you how the program will be scrutinized and what kinds of failures will create legal consequences.