CSDDD vs National Due Diligence Laws
Several EU member states enacted national human rights due diligence laws before CSDDD was adopted — Germany (LkSG), France (Loi de Vigilance), and the Netherlands (CSDD, proposed). CSDDD sets an EU minimum standard that these national laws must align with — but national laws that exceed CSDDD standards remain in force.
Several EU member states enacted national human rights due diligence laws before CSDDD was adopted — Germany (LkSG), France (Loi de Vigilance), and the Netherlands (CSDD, proposed). Germany's Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG) entered into force on 1 January 2023 for companies with 3,000+ employees (extended to 1,000+ employees from January 2024).
Germany — Lieferkettensorgfaltspflichtengesetz (LkSG)
Germany's Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG) entered into force on 1 January 2023 for companies with 3,000+ employees (extended to 1,000+ employees from January 2024). It was the most significant national due diligence law in the EU before CSDDD.
Key LkSG requirements: Companies must establish a risk management system; conduct risk analyses of own operations and direct suppliers; take preventive and remediation measures; establish a complaints procedure; document and report annually; and conduct due diligence for indirect suppliers where there is substantiated knowledge of violations.
LkSG vs CSDDD — key differences: LkSG currently excludes civil liability — affected persons cannot sue companies in German courts for LkSG violations (only administrative enforcement). CSDDD requires Germany to introduce civil liability — a significant amendment to LkSG transposition. LkSG focuses on direct (tier 1) suppliers for regular due diligence; CSDDD extends to indirect suppliers more broadly. LkSG covers specific human rights (21 listed rights) and specific environmental conventions; CSDDD coverage is somewhat broader.
For German companies: LkSG compliance provides a strong foundation for CSDDD compliance. The main gaps to address in CSDDD transposition: civil liability introduction; broader indirect supplier due diligence; and the climate transition plan obligation under CSDDD Article 22 (not in LkSG).
France — Loi de Vigilance
France's Corporate Duty of Vigilance Law (Loi de Vigilance) was adopted in 2017 — one of the first national human rights due diligence laws globally. It applies to French companies with 5,000+ employees in France or 10,000+ employees worldwide.
Key Loi de Vigilance requirements: Companies must establish and publish a vigilance plan covering: risk mapping; regular assessment of subsidiaries and suppliers; appropriate actions to mitigate risks; an alert mechanism for risks; and a monitoring mechanism to track implementation. The plan must be published in the annual report.
Enforcement: France's Loi de Vigilance includes civil liability — a pioneering feature that CSDDD now extends to all EU member states. Courts can: order companies to fulfil their vigilance obligations; suspend environmentally harmful activities pending due diligence; and award damages to victims of adverse impacts caused by due diligence failures. Several significant litigation cases have been brought under Loi de Vigilance — including against TotalEnergies (Uganda pipeline), EDF (climate strategy), and BNP Paribas (financing of coal and fossil fuels).
For French companies: Loi de Vigilance compliance provides the most complete foundation for CSDDD compliance of any national law — civil liability is already in place, risk mapping and monitoring are established practices, and the vigilance plan format maps closely to CSDDD due diligence documentation requirements.
CSDDD transposition — what member states must do by 2026
CSDDD requires member states to adopt and publish national transposition measures by 26 July 2026. The Directive sets minimum standards — member states can exceed these but cannot fall below them.
For member states with existing national laws (Germany, France): they must amend national legislation to align with CSDDD minimum standards where national laws fall short — particularly on civil liability (Germany) and scope expansion. They can retain stricter national provisions.
For member states without national laws (Italy, Spain, Poland, and most others): they must enact entirely new legislation — transposing CSDDD requirements into national law. The Directive gives significant flexibility on implementation details — administrative structure, penalty levels (above the 5% minimum), court procedures for civil liability, and supervisory authority designation.
Monitoring transposition: The European Commission monitors transposition and can bring infringement proceedings against member states that fail to transpose correctly or on time. For companies, the practical implication is that national implementing law details — which court handles civil claims, exactly how the NCA operates, the precise penalty scale — will vary by member state. Companies operating across multiple member states must monitor national transposition in each jurisdiction.
For non-EU companies: the choice of authorised representative member state determines which national transposition applies. Member states with more developed regulatory frameworks and clearer CSDDD transposition (Germany, France, Netherlands) may be preferable for companies seeking regulatory clarity.
Frequently asked questions
If we are already compliant with LkSG, are we CSDDD-compliant?
Largely but not fully. LkSG compliance provides a strong foundation — risk management system, risk analysis, preventive measures, complaints procedure, and annual reporting are all in place. Key gaps: LkSG lacks civil liability (CSDDD requires it); LkSG indirect supplier due diligence is narrower than CSDDD; and LkSG has no transition plan obligation equivalent to CSDDD Article 22. Gap analysis against CSDDD requirements is essential.
Can French companies use their Loi de Vigilance plan as their CSDDD due diligence documentation?
Yes — the Loi de Vigilance vigilance plan maps closely to CSDDD due diligence documentation requirements. French companies should review their vigilance plan against CSDDD requirements and extend it where necessary. The main extensions needed: more explicit value chain mapping beyond direct suppliers; more systematic prioritisation of adverse impacts; and transition plan documentation under CSDDD Article 22.
What happens to national due diligence laws after CSDDD is transposed?
National laws remain in force where they exceed CSDDD minimum standards. France's Loi de Vigilance is stricter than CSDDD in some respects (broader company scope) — it continues to apply to French companies. Germany's LkSG must be amended to add civil liability but otherwise continues. CSDDD creates a floor, not a ceiling.