# GDPR Article 65: Dispute Resolution by the Board

- Source: https://support.icompaas.com/support/solutions/articles/62000236411-gdpr-article-65-dispute-resolution-by-the-board
- Section: [Solutions](https://support.icompaas.com/support/solutions) › [GDPR](https://support.icompaas.com/support/solutions/62000112722) › [Chapter VII: Cooperation and Consistency](https://support.icompaas.com/support/solutions/folders/gdpr-chapter-7-cooperation-and-consistency)
- Last updated: 2026-07-11
- Publisher: iCompaas, Inc. (https://www.icompaas.com)

### **Overview**

This article establishes a process for the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) to resolve disputes among supervisory authorities. Disputes may arise from objections to a lead supervisory authority’s draft decision (Article 60(4)), conflicts over competency, or failure to comply with Board opinions (Article 64). The Board issues binding decisions within 1–2 months, decided by a two-thirds majority, which are binding on all supervisory authorities and published after notification.

  

### **Key Principles**

-   Binding Resolution: EDPB decisions are enforceable across all supervisory authorities.
    
-   Timely Decision-Making: Decisions are made within 1–2 months of the dispute arising.
    
-   Majority Voting: Decisions require a two-thirds majority of Board members.
    
-   Transparency: Decisions are published after notification to ensure accountability.
    
-   Conflict Management: Mechanism resolves objections, competency disputes, and non-compliance with Board opinions.  
      
    

### **Organizational Applicability**

This article applies to:

-   The European Data Protection Board managing disputes between supervisory authorities.
    
-   Lead and concerned supervisory authorities subject to dispute resolution.
    
-   Controllers and processors affected by decisions from cross-border enforcement disputes.
    
-   Teams involved in compliance, legal, and regulatory coordination.  
      
    

### **Implementation Requirements**

-   Submit disputes to the EDPB in accordance with Articles 60(4) and 64.
    
-   Ensure documentation of objections, competency conflicts, or non-compliance issues.
    
-   Implement and enforce the Board’s binding decision across all concerned authorities.
    
-   Maintain records of disputes, decisions, and communications for transparency and accountability.  
      
    

### **Implementation Guidance**

-   Develop internal procedures for raising and handling disputes with the Board.
    
-   Train staff on timelines, submission requirements, and response obligations.
    
-   Coordinate with other supervisory authorities to comply with binding decisions.
    
-   Periodically review dispute resolution processes to ensure efficiency and compliance.  
      
    

### **Periodic Review**

-   Frequency: Annually or as disputes arise.
    
-   Responsible Role: Lead Supervisory Authority, Compliance Team, or Legal.
    
-   Outcome: Ensure disputes are resolved promptly, decisions are implemented, and cross-border compliance is maintained.  
      
    

### **Non-Compliance Risks**

-   Fines: Up to €20 million or 4% of global annual turnover for supervised entities.
    
-   Legal Exposure: Challenges or non-compliance with binding Board decisions.
    
-   Reputational Damage: Loss of trust in supervisory authorities and cross-border enforcement.
    
-   Operational Risk: Delays or conflicts in implementing decisions may disrupt GDPR enforcement.

## Related compliance guidance

- [GDPR compliance: a practical implementation guide for cloud-native SaaS teams](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/gdpr): How the Regulation fits together as a programme — lawful bases, Article 28/30/32/33 obligations, transfers and the DPIA process.
- [India's DPDP Act 2023: a practical compliance guide for cloud teams](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/india-dpdp-act-2023): If you also serve users in India, the DPDP Act borrows GDPR concepts but differs on consent, breach reporting and transfers.