Art.85

Article 85 – Right to Lodge a Complaint with a Market Surveillance Authority

Governance SME Relevant ~2 min read · 462 words

Article 85 gives any natural or legal person the right to lodge a complaint with a national market surveillance authority about a suspected violation of the EU AI Act. It opens Section 4 on Remedies — the part of the Act that creates rights for individuals and organisations affected by AI systems, not just obligations for those who build them.

⚠ Medium compliance impact for SMEs

WHAT THE ARTICLE IS ABOUT

The formal complaint right that enables civil enforcement

Article 85 establishes the right to complain — a core enforcement mechanism that allows individuals, businesses and organisations to bring suspected AI Act violations to the attention of market surveillance authorities. It is part of a broader remedies framework that positions affected persons as active participants in enforcement rather than passive subjects.

WHAT IT SAYS

Anyone may complain, authority must consider it, complainant gets feedback

Any natural or legal person who has reason to consider that there has been an infringement of the provisions of the AI Act may submit a complaint to the relevant market surveillance authority
Complaints must be submitted to the market surveillance authority of the member state where the alleged infringement occurred or where the provider or deployer has their place of business
The authority must investigate the complaint — it cannot simply dismiss it without consideration
The authority must inform the complainant of the outcome of their complaint and any measures taken
Complaints may be submitted anonymously where national law permits this
The complaint right does not limit other remedies available to the complainant under national or Union law

WHO IS AFFECTED

Any person or organisation who believes the Act has been violated

Individuals who have been subject to decisions made by high-risk AI systems and believe their rights were violated
Businesses that have been affected by competitors’ non-compliant AI systems
Civil society organisations monitoring AI deployment and compliance
Employees who have been affected by workplace AI systems
Market surveillance authorities who must receive, investigate and respond to complaints

WHAT IT MEANS FOR SMES

A double-edged provision — you can use it and others can use it against you

As a user of AI systems: if a GPAI model provider or high-risk AI system is causing harm and you suspect AI Act non-compliance, you have a formal right to complain — this is your escalation path beyond voluntary engagement
As a provider: anyone who believes your AI system violates the Act can trigger an investigation through this route — disgruntled customers, competitors, or civil society organisations
The complaint right makes proactive compliance even more important — enforcement is not just authority-initiated; it can be triggered by any affected party
Where your business has been disadvantaged by a competitor’s non-compliant AI system — undercutting you through reduced compliance costs — this article gives you a formal remedy route
Document your own compliance carefully: a complaint investigation will review your compliance records, and well-maintained documentation is your strongest defence

Article 74 — Market surveillance (the authorities that receive and act on complaints)
Article 86 — Right to explanation (a companion individual right in the same section)
Article 87 — Reporting of infringements (the whistleblower provision — related but distinct)
Article 79 — National enforcement procedure (the procedure that follows a substantiated complaint)

← Back to the Guide