Article 60: Cooperation between the lead supervisory authority and the other supervisory authorities concerned - GDPR

1. The lead supervisory authority shall cooperate with the other supervisory authorities concerned in an endeavour to reach consensus. The lead supervisory authority and the supervisory authorities concerned shall exchange all relevant information with each other.

2. The lead supervisory authority may request at any time other supervisory authorities concerned to provide mutual assistance pursuant to Article 61 and may conduct joint operations pursuant to Article 62, in particular for carrying out investigations or for monitoring the implementation of a measure concerning a controller or processor established in another Member State.

3. The lead supervisory authority shall, without delay, communicate the relevant information on the matter to the other supervisory authorities concerned. It shall without delay submit a draft decision to the other supervisory authorities concerned for their opinion and take due account of their views.

4. Where any of the other supervisory authorities concerned within a period of four weeks after having been consulted in accordance with paragraph 3 of this Article, expresses a relevant and reasoned objection to the draft decision, the lead supervisory authority shall, if it does not follow the relevant and reasoned objection or is of the opinion that the objection is not relevant or reasoned, submit the matter to the consistency mechanism referred to in Article 63.

5. Where the lead supervisory authority intends to follow the relevant and reasoned objection made, it shall submit to the other supervisory authorities concerned a revised draft decision for their opinion. That revised draft decision shall be subject to the procedure referred to in paragraph 4 within a period of two weeks.

6. Where none of the other supervisory authorities concerned has objected to the draft decision submitted by the lead supervisory authority within the period referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5, the lead supervisory authority and the supervisory authorities concerned shall be deemed to be in agreement with that draft decision and shall be bound by it.

7. The lead supervisory authority shall adopt and notify the decision to the main establishment or single establishment of the controller or processor, as the case may be and inform the other supervisory authorities concerned and the Board of the decision in question, including a summary of the relevant facts and grounds. The supervisory authority with which a complaint has been lodged shall inform the complainant on the decision.

8. By derogation from paragraph 7, where a complaint is dismissed or rejected, the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged shall adopt the decision and notify it to the complainant and shall inform the controller thereof.

9. Where the lead supervisory authority and the supervisory authorities concerned agree to dismiss or reject parts of a complaint and to act on other parts of that complaint, a separate decision shall be adopted for each of those parts of the matter. The lead supervisory authority shall adopt the decision for the part concerning actions in relation to the controller, shall notify it to the main establishment or single establishment of the controller or processor on the territory of its Member State and shall inform the complainant thereof, while the supervisory authority of the complainant shall adopt the decision for the part concerning dismissal or rejection of that complaint, and shall notify it to that complainant and shall inform the controller or processor thereof.

10. After being notified of the decision of the lead supervisory authority pursuant to paragraphs 7 and 9, the controller or processor shall take the necessary measures to ensure compliance with the decision as regards processing activities in the context of all its establishments in the Union. The controller or processor shall notify the measures taken for complying with the decision to the lead supervisory authority, which shall inform the other supervisory authorities concerned.

11. Where, in exceptional circumstances, a supervisory authority concerned has reasons to consider that there is an urgent need to act in order to protect the interests of data subjects, the urgency procedure referred to in Article 66 shall apply.

12. The lead supervisory authority and the other supervisory authorities concerned shall supply the information required under this Article to each other by electronic means, using a standardised format.

Understanding This Article

Article 60 is the procedural heart of the one-stop-shop mechanism, defining how the lead supervisory authority (Article 56) cooperates with other "concerned" supervisory authorities—those in Member States where processing substantially affects data subjects. This cooperation ensures one-stop-shop doesn't mean one authority acting unilaterally, but rather coordinated decision-making that respects all affected Member States' interests.

The procedure works as follows: The lead authority investigates the case, cooperating with concerned authorities and exchanging information (paragraphs 1-2). It then prepares a draft decision and shares it with concerned authorities for their opinion (paragraph 3). Concerned authorities have four weeks to review and can raise "relevant and reasoned objections" if they disagree (paragraph 4). These objections must be substantive—explaining why the draft violates GDPR, why the legal analysis is wrong, or why the measures are insufficient.

If the lead authority accepts the objection, it revises the draft decision, and concerned authorities get two weeks for additional review (paragraph 5). If no objections arise within the timeframes, all authorities are deemed in agreement and bound by the decision (paragraph 6). This tacit approval mechanism prevents delays from authorities simply not responding.

If the lead authority disagrees with a relevant and reasoned objection, the matter escalates to the "consistency mechanism" (Article 63), where the European Data Protection Board can issue a binding decision resolving the dispute. This prevents deadlock while ensuring dissenting authorities can't be ignored.

Paragraph 10 requires controllers/processors to implement the decision across all EU establishments, not just in the lead authority's Member State. This is crucial—a decision by the Irish DPC about Facebook applies to Facebook's data processing throughout the EU, not just in Ireland.

The urgency procedure (paragraph 11, detailed in Article 66) allows concerned authorities to take immediate action if delays would harm data subjects—for example, ongoing massive data breaches or illegal surveillance requiring immediate suspension.

Key Points

Lead authority must cooperate with concerned authorities to reach consensus

Must share draft decisions and take other authorities' views into account

Concerned authorities have four weeks to raise relevant and reasoned objections

If objection not followed, matter goes to consistency mechanism (Article 63)

If no objections within timeframe, all authorities deemed in agreement

Controller must implement decision across all EU establishments

Urgency procedure available for situations requiring immediate action

Understanding This Article

Key Points

Related Recitals

Related Articles in Chapter 6

Popular Articles