The New Shapes of Consumer and Market Law: Digitization, Sustainability, and Enforcement – Looking Back and Forward

With the Sustainability Omnibus of last week still keeping us in shock and the incoming Digital Omnibus already looming over us, it is important to pause, take a step back, and ask ourselves, what role consumer and market law, including competition and regulatory law, plays and can play in the twin digital and sustainable transition the world is living through?

These and many more key questions were tackled this fall at the 2025 EuCML Annual Conference held at the beautiful Villa Braida in Veneto, Italy. The conference did not only bring together global leaders to share their visions through keynotes or discussions, but more specifically put the next generation of consumer and market lawyers at the forefront. The five participants of the first EuCML Best Paper Award presented their thought-provoking papers dealing with new shapes of consumer and market law in the areas of digitization, sustainability, and enforcement. In the end, Sarah Hinck won with her paper “Technological Rule-Setting Power of Digital Platform Ecosystems – Code is Law Revisited” – more on this in a minute (DMA/digital competition enforcers, read on!)

If the following insights inspire you to become active as well, the EuCML editors are already working hard to plan the 2026 Annual Conference with a Best Paper Award, taking place at the University of Ferrara on 10 and 11 September 2026. Next year’s edition will focus on the timely topic of “Private and Public Enforcement of Consumer and Market Law” – submit your papers by 15 May 2026 (Call for Papers) and your thoughts will be evaluated by leading experts from academia, the judiciary, legal practice, enforcement authorities, EU institutions, or consumer and business associations.

***

In sunny Villa Braida in September 2025, after a welcome by editor in chief Alberto De Franceschi (University of Ferrara/KU Leuven), the conference got kicked off with three keynotes, focussing on the three key issues of the conference. President of the European Academy of Sciences and Arts Klaus Mainzer (Technical University of Munich) explored how digitalisation and sustainability in the specific context of AI pose challenges for European markets and consumers. Relying on examples and modelling, he questioned the overall role of the current regulatory regime in Europe that should work for markets and consumers but might not fulfil that potential. Artificial Intelligence was also followed up by Frank Pasquale (Cornel Law School/Cornell Tech), who presented his most recent, seminal research on fake persons and artificial emotions. He emphasized the growing role of AI from an intelligence tool to a tool fulfilling emotional functions, such as AI friends, lovers, advisors, or mental health coaches. The legal challenges going with such a trend, such as consumer protection, freedom of choice, freedom of expression, etc. are not fully encompassed and require further research before real-time developments overtake us. Marco Scialdone (Consumer Empowerment Project) then already took us to important topics that will likely be covered in the 2026 edition: the effective enforcement of consumer rights online. He criticised the lack of a uniform system for consumer enforcement in Europe, with 27 systems and consumer organisation competing amongst each other, and the overall misconception of legislators on key topics, such as opt-out or litigation funding.

The first paper “Product Liability and by Design Regulation” presented by Silvia Martinelli (University of Turin), chaired by Hans-Wolfgang Micklitz (European University Institute) and discussed by Geraint Howells (University of Galway) and Jean Sébastien Borghetti (Panthéon-Assas University) provoked a discussion on the new 2024 Product Liability Directive and their regulatory requirements regarding protections or features that must be integrated during the design phase of a product. In particular, the intersection between product liability and product safety became pertinent. Silvia particularly outlined how the new Product Liability Directive extends this logic by addressing risks arising from interface design, code architecture, and AI system behaviour, thereby redefining what may constitute a “defect” in the digital sphere.

Nicholas Mouttotos and Eva Angeline Trinidad (University of Bremen) then presented their paper “Artificial Intelligence, Reasonable Expectations and Validity of Consumer Contracts”. Their presentation was chaired by Giovanni Sartor (University of Bologna) and discussed by Frank Pasquale (Cornel Law School/Cornell Tech). As AI systems increasingly interact with consumers – through chatbots, recommender systems, automated negotiations, dynamic pricing engines, and even embedded smart-device software – they influence how consumer contracts are formed. The recurring topic, already brought forward by Frank Pasquale in his keynote, was how informed and voluntary consent can work in such situations and what needs to be done in order to protect consumers. The presenters recognised the potential of AI agents in genuinely helping consumers navigating standard-form contracts by mitigating information overload or detecting abusive clauses but also recognized the dangers of moving beyond the human-centric, information-based model.

Chaired by Sergio Cámara Lapuente (University of La Rioja) and discussed by Christian Twigg-Flesner (University of Warwick) and Anne-Christine Fornage (University of Lausanne), Sarah Hinck presented the paper that was declared winner the next day and dealt with “Technological Rule-Setting Power of Digital Platform Ecosystems – Code is Law Revisited”. Relying on the concept of Code is Law, the panel discussions circled around the possibilities of digital platforms to convey technological governance over the market, and the role competition law plays in such scenarios. In particular, Sarah discusses the decision of the German Bundeskartellamt to designate Microsoft as an undertaking of paramount significance for competition across markets under Section 19a of the German Act against Competition Restraints. This designation relies on Microsoft’s ability to regulate access to, and competition within, its ecosystem markets, such as operating systems and cloud services, through the technical interfaces on which third-party developers depend for integration and access to core functionality. These dependencies directly affect third-party developers’ business activities and product development. As Sarah’s contribution illustrates, this example highlights the broader potential for normative power in EU digital regulations such as the DMA.

The second day got kicked off by Thitinan Ngamsanguan (University of Exeter) with “Digital Fairness, Algorithmic Manipulation and Behavioural Exploitation: A Critical Perspective on the DSA”. The panel was moderated by Hans Schulte-Nölke (University of Osnabrück), with Rupprecht Podszun (University of Düsseldorf) and Thomas Streinz (European University Institute) acting as discussants. The presentation highlighted how AI-driven personalisation and persuasive interface design increasingly challenge the assumptions underpinning EU consumer protection law, particularly the notion of the “average consumer.” Drawing on universal vulnerability theory, the paper argued for a more context-sensitive interpretation of Article 25(1) DSA to better address structural forms of algorithmic manipulation. The discussion underscored that, while the DSA represents an important regulatory step, further conceptual and legal refinement may be necessary to safeguard user autonomy in AI-optimised digital environments. The conversation moved from a critical analysis of the DSA itself, to the looming issue of what and to which degree a Digital Fairness Act is needed or weather the Unfair Commercial Practice Directive would not suffice (with better enforcement).

The last presenter Jie Ouyang (University of Groningen) won an honourable mentioning for the best presentation for his paper “Turning EU Consumer Law Against Itself? Taking Stock of the EU’s Sustainable Consumption Strategy”. The discussion was chaired by Charlotte Pavillon (University of Groningen), with insights by Anna Beckers (University of Maastricht) and Paola Iamiceli (University of Trento). Jie focused on the evolving issue of ethical consumerism, examining the balance between what can be left to consumers and what requires regulation at the EU level. At the same time, he situated the debate on ethical consumerism within the broader political economy of the EU’s sustainability agenda. Again the “by design” notion came up, with the discussion swifting to a “sustainable consumption by design” regulation in Europe. In the vein of radical proposals, Jie engaged the notion of a “planetary” consumer policy that challenges existing assumptions about the role and responsibility of consumers in achieving the Union’s green transition.

After the award ceremony, Hans-Wolfgang Micklitz (European University Institute) shared key takeaways and seminal thoughts on the role of EuCML and consumer and market law overall, already printed as an editorial (available here) in issue 5/2025 of EuCML and showing the need for the ongoing discussion and conference in 2026. The rest of the paper discussed at the Villa Braida conference will be published in the incoming EuCML edition 6/2025.

***

As the discussions in Villa Braida vividly demonstrated, consumer and market law now sits at the centre of the digital and sustainable transitions shaping European society. The challenges raised by AI-driven contracting, platform governance, algorithmic manipulation, and sustainable consumption are no longer abstract questions but pressing realities that demand renewed legal imagination and coordinated enforcement. What emerged most clearly from this year’s conference is that the future of the field will depend on the continued dialogue between disciplines, generations, and institution – bridging theory and practice, regulation and innovation. The momentum built in Italy offers both a compass and a call to action. And yet, as many speakers underlined, the real test no longer lies in adopting ever more rules (unless watered down by further Omnibus reforms) but in ensuring that the existing framework is enforced effectively and coherently across Europe. This, precisely, is the challenge that the 2026 Conference in Ferrara will take up, promising to push the discussion to an even more effective impact in service of our values and society.