Before you act on mediation under EU marketplace rules: a checklist

TL;DRMediation under EU marketplace rules is a structured, platform-hosted process that gives Amazon Italy sellers a defined right to raise unresolved disputes – including suspensions and listing removals – before an independent mediator, as required by the Platform-to-Business (P2B) Regulation. It is not an informal complaint. It is a procedural lever with real deadlines, and how you prepare the file before you engage it determines almost everything that follows.

A suspension on Amazon IT can feel like a closed door. The listing is down, the account is restricted, and the appeal path inside Seller Central may have already returned a rejection. What many sellers on Amazon Italy do not know – and what we see regularly in matters we handle – is that EU rules create a separate, legally grounded channel that sits on top of the platform's own internal review. That channel is mediation under the P2B Regulation, and using it well requires a structured approach before you file the first line.

This checklist works through every phase: understanding what the process actually is on Amazon IT, assembling the right evidence, evaluating whether mediation is the right move for your situation, preparing the submission, and deciding what to do if mediation stalls. Work through each phase in order. Skipping ahead is how sellers lose the procedural advantage the rules give them.

Phase 1: Understand what mediation under EU marketplace rules actually is on Amazon IT

Mediation under EU marketplace rules is not the same as Amazon's internal appeals process, and treating it as a faster version of a Plan of Action is a common and costly mistake.

The Platform-to-Business (P2B) Regulation requires covered platforms – including Amazon operating in EU member states such as Italy – to provide business users with access to at least two independent mediators when the platform's internal complaint-handling system has failed to resolve a dispute. The P2B Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 has applied since July 2020, making it one of the most durable and actionable rights available to EU marketplace sellers. The scope covers ranking, account suspension, listing removal, and changes to terms that affect a seller's ability to trade.

What this means for an Amazon IT seller: once you have exhausted, or substantially worked through, Amazon's internal complaint-handling system without a satisfactory result, you have a right to invoke mediation with an external mediator. The platform must engage in that process in good faith. It cannot simply ignore it. That is leverage – not a guarantee of reinstatement, but a real procedural right with consequences for the platform if it refuses to participate.

The Digital Services Act (DSA) adds a further layer for sellers on platforms Amazon operates as a Very Large Online Platform (VLOP). Under the DSA, Amazon must provide a statement of reasons for any restriction of a seller's service, and its internal complaint-handling system must be functional and accessible. If those procedural obligations are not met, that failure is itself relevant to a mediation case.

Checks for Phase 1:

• Confirm that the dispute involves Amazon IT specifically – the P2B Regulation applies to the EU member-state platform where the relationship is established.
• Identify whether the dispute is a suspension, a listing removal, a ranking change, or a terms amendment – all are within scope.
• Verify that you have received, or demanded, a statement of reasons from Amazon explaining the restriction, as required by P2B and reinforced by the DSA.
• Confirm your entity is a "business user" within the meaning of P2B – a legal person or individual trader using the platform for commercial purposes.
• Note whether you have already used Amazon's internal complaint-handling system and what response, if any, you received.

For a full account of how EU rules apply to marketplace sellers across surfaces and jurisdictions, our EU marketplace regulation complete guide for sellers covers the applicable instruments in detail.

Phase 2: Has the internal complaint path actually been completed?

Mediation under P2B is available only after the internal complaint-handling system has been engaged – and Amazon's internal system on Amazon IT has specific requirements that must be met before a mediator can be properly invoked.

This is the phase where sellers most often make a procedural error. They either skip the internal stage entirely and go straight to a mediator (which a mediator may reject as premature), or they treat a single auto-rejection in Seller Central as a completed internal process (which it is not). The P2B Regulation requires the platform's internal system to be "easy to access", "free of charge", and to process complaints within a reasonable period. A meaningful complaint, not a casual button click, triggers the obligation.

In matters we handle involving Amazon IT sellers, the internal complaint stage often involves: submitting a written, reasoned dispute through the Seller Central complaint path; documenting the basis in EU law (specifically citing P2B obligations); and requesting a substantive written response. If the platform's internal handler returns a form response that does not engage with the substance, that is itself a failure of the internal system – and it becomes evidence.

Checks for Phase 2:

• Have you submitted a formal, written complaint through Amazon's designated internal complaint channel – not just an appeal of a deactivation notice?
• Did the complaint specifically identify the P2B Regulation as the basis for your rights?
• Did you receive a substantive, reasoned response – or a templated non-answer?
• If you received no response within a reasonable period, have you documented the non-response with timestamps?
• Do you have a complete record of every communication in the internal process, including screenshots and email confirmations?

If the internal complaint stage has not been properly completed, do it now – properly, in writing, and with explicit reference to the applicable EU rules. A well-evidenced internal complaint that Amazon fails to answer adequately is often the strongest single piece of evidence you will bring to a mediator.

Phase 3: Is your evidence file ready?

A mediation case is only as strong as the file behind it, and assembling the evidence before you file – not during – is the difference between a credible case and a submission that stalls at the first procedural review.

The mediator is not Amazon. The mediator is an independent third party who will read your file and Amazon's response. That means the file must stand on its own. It must be factual, organized, and grounded in the applicable rules. It cannot rely on Seller Central screenshots alone. It must tell a complete story: what your account history was, what triggered the restriction, what Amazon said (or failed to say), what rule was breached, and what remedy you are seeking.

A seasonal pattern we see in matters involving Amazon IT sellers: accounts restricted in the lead-up to high-volume trading periods (summer or pre-Christmas) with appeal timelines that run past the peak. The evidence file in those cases needs to capture not just the legal issue but the commercial reality – what trading the seller was unable to conduct, and why that matters to the proportionality assessment a mediator will make.

Checks for Phase 3:

• Do you have the original restriction or suspension notice from Amazon IT, with the date and stated reason?
• Do you have the statement of reasons Amazon provided, or documented evidence that it failed to provide one?
• Do you have records of all communications in the internal complaint process, including response times?
• Do you have your account history – selling history, performance metrics, policy compliance record – to establish the baseline before the restriction?
• Have you identified the specific P2B, DSA, or DMA obligation that Amazon's conduct breaches?
• Have you documented the commercial impact of the restriction in objective terms – disruption to order fulfillment, inventory affected, period out of trade?
• Is all documentation available in, or translatable to, the language the mediator operates in?

For matters involving listing removals on product-safety grounds specifically, our page on responding to an EU listing takedown on safety grounds the right way addresses the documentation requirements in that scenario.

Phase 4: Choosing and engaging the right mediator

Amazon is required under the P2B Regulation to identify, in its terms for business users, two or more mediators that it is willing to engage with – and a seller may choose among them.

This is a decision point, not a formality. Different mediators have different procedural rules, timelines, language requirements, and costs. Some are better suited to account-level commercial disputes; others are more familiar with IP or product-compliance contexts. Choosing without reviewing the mediator's own rules is a mistake that affects how long the process takes and what procedural tools you have within it.

The P2B Regulation sets minimum requirements for mediators: independence, affordability, effectiveness, and a process conducted in the language of the business user's establishment. For an Amazon IT seller, that typically means Italian or English, depending on how the seller's entity is registered and operates. Confirming language availability before filing avoids a delay that can run to several weeks.

Checks for Phase 4:

• Have you identified the mediators Amazon names in its P2B-compliant terms for Amazon IT business users?
• Have you reviewed each mediator's own procedural rules, fees, and language options?
• Have you confirmed the mediator operates in a language you can use effectively for submissions?
• Do you understand the mediator's expected timeline from filing to a preliminary response?
• Have you confirmed the mediator's fee structure and whether it is proportionate to the value of the dispute?
• Have you assessed whether the mediator has experience with platform-to-business disputes specifically, rather than general commercial mediation?

The path depends significantly on which mediator is selected and what procedural choices you make at the outset. Spending a week on mediator selection, before filing, often shortens the overall timeline.

Phase 5: Preparing the mediation submission

The submission is your first impression with the mediator and Amazon's legal team simultaneously – it needs to be precise, readable, and grounded entirely in documented facts and applicable rules.

A mediator cannot award you reinstatement by decree. What a mediator can do is facilitate a negotiated resolution, put procedural pressure on the platform, and in some frameworks provide a non-binding recommendation that carries real weight if the matter escalates. The submission should be drafted with that in mind: factual, proportionate, and clear about the remedy you are seeking. Vague submissions that ask for "fairness" without a specific ask give the mediator nothing to work with.

In matters we handle involving EU platform disputes, the submissions that move quickly share three features: they identify the breach of a specific rule, they quantify the impact in concrete terms, and they state a clear, realistic remedy. Submissions that drift into narrative about perceived unfairness – without grounding each point in a specific obligation – typically stall at the preliminary phase.

Checks for Phase 5:

• Does the submission open with a clear statement of the specific restriction and the date it took effect?
• Does it identify, by name, the EU regulation or platform obligation breached?
• Does it attach, or reference by index number, each piece of evidence in the file?
• Does it state a specific remedy – reinstatement, reversal of the listing removal, production of a compliant statement of reasons?
• Is it written in the language of the mediation?
• Has it been reviewed for factual accuracy against the evidence file before filing?
• Does it avoid outcome predictions, legal conclusions, or inflammatory language that could undermine credibility with the mediator?

An Amazon IT seller in summer 2025 – a consumer-electronics distributor – came to us after two internal complaint submissions had produced only form responses and a listing removal on CE-marking grounds remained in place. We reconstructed the internal complaint record, identified the failure to provide a compliant statement of reasons, assembled the technical documentation, and filed a structured mediation submission with one of the mediators Amazon had identified in its P2B terms. The listing was reinstated during the mediation process, before a formal mediator recommendation was issued.

For further context on how CE-marking complaints play out procedurally on Amazon's EU platforms, our analysis of CE-marking complaints and delisting on Amazon DE sets out the comparable process on the German marketplace.

Phase 6: Managing the mediation process and your decision points

Filing the submission is not the end of active work – it is the beginning of a process with several decision points where the wrong move can narrow your options.

Once the mediator accepts the filing, Amazon will typically respond through its legal or policy team. That response is often the first substantive engagement the seller has had from anyone at Amazon with authority over the dispute. It is also the first moment you learn what Amazon's actual position is – which may be different from the automated or templated communications you received in Seller Central.

The seller's decision points in the process include: whether to accept a partial resolution (for example, reinstatement of some listings but not all); whether to request a mediator recommendation if the parties are at an impasse; and whether the resolution, if any, includes terms that affect future trading on Amazon IT. Each of those decisions has downstream consequences. A seller who accepts a partial resolution without clarifying what it means for the underlying account health record may find the issue resurfaces in the next performance review cycle.

Checks for Phase 6:

• Have you set internal timelines for reviewing Amazon's response and deciding your next submission?
• Before accepting any partial resolution, have you confirmed in writing what it covers and what it does not?
• Have you assessed whether a mediator recommendation is available in this mediator's procedural rules, and under what conditions?
• If Amazon fails to engage in the process in good faith, have you documented that failure for potential escalation under DSA or DMA enforcement routes?
• If the mediation resolves the immediate dispute, have you addressed the underlying account health record to avoid recurrence?
• Have you considered whether the resolution terms should be documented in a written settlement or whether relying on a Seller Central reinstatement alone is adequate?

The steps above describe the standard procedural path. Your matter turns on the exact wording of the restriction notice, the account history, the specific EU rule engaged, and the timeline from the original restriction – which is what we review in a first assessment.

To discuss where your matter stands in this process, email info@tutamenlaw.com. We review the documentation and tell you what the realistic options are before you commit to a filing strategy.

Phase 7: Trade-offs and the myth that EU sellers have no leverage

The idea that a platform suspension under EU rules is effectively final – that the seller's only option is to appeal, be rejected, and accept the outcome – is one of the most persistent and damaging myths in EU marketplace practice.

It is wrong. The P2B Regulation, the DSA, and where applicable the DMA give EU marketplace sellers procedural rights that most never exercise because they do not know they exist. The internal complaint-handling system must function. Statements of reasons must be provided. Mediators must be accessible. And the platform – including Amazon as a VLOP under the DSA – faces regulatory scrutiny from designated authorities if it systematically fails to meet those obligations. A well-prepared seller who documents every step of the process has leverage that a seller who simply re-submits appeals in Seller Central does not.

The trade-offs are real. Mediation takes time – typically several weeks from filing to a substantive response, and longer if the mediation runs to a formal recommendation phase. That timeline has a commercial cost. For a seller on Amazon IT whose account is suspended during a high-volume trading period, time is the scarcest resource. The decision to use mediation rather than – or alongside – continued internal appeal must be made with that cost in view. In some matters, the right strategy is to run both tracks simultaneously: pursue the internal complaint process while filing the mediation case, because the two are not mutually exclusive.

There is also a decision to make about escalation. If mediation does not produce a resolution, the DSA provides an additional layer: the seller can bring a complaint to the Digital Services Coordinator for the member state where Amazon's EU establishment is located. That is a regulatory enforcement route, not a dispute-resolution route, and its timeline is longer. But the documentation assembled for mediation is directly useful there. Nothing prepared for mediation is wasted if the matter escalates.

Checks for Phase 7:

• Have you assessed the commercial cost of mediation's timeline against the cost of continued trading restriction?
• Have you considered running the internal complaint and mediation tracks in parallel, given they are not mutually exclusive?
• If mediation fails, do you understand what DSA or DMA escalation routes are available for your specific situation?
• Have you preserved all documentation from the mediation process for potential regulatory escalation?

If a first submission has already come back without a satisfactory response, or if the mediation process has stalled, a second review of the file can identify what specifically went wrong and whether any path remains open. Email info@tutamenlaw.com with your documentation and we will tell you what we see.

Related areas

• EU Marketplace Regulation – full practice overview covering DSA, P2B, DMA, and EU suspension defense
• EU marketplace regulation guide – the complete seller-focused reference for EU platform rules

Frequently asked questions about mediation under EU marketplace rules

How long does resolving mediation under EU marketplace rules usually take on Amazon IT?

The timeline depends on how quickly the mediator accepts the filing, how promptly Amazon engages, and whether the matter resolves at the facilitated negotiation stage or proceeds to a formal recommendation. In matters we handle, a substantive response from Amazon's side typically arrives within several weeks of the mediator accepting the case. Full resolution – including reinstatement or listing restoration where that is the outcome – can take anywhere from a few weeks to several months, depending on the complexity of the dispute and the mediator's own procedural timeline. Filing a well-prepared submission from the start consistently shortens the overall period.

What are the main risks if I handle mediation under eu marketplace rules alone?

The main risks are procedural: filing before the internal complaint-handling stage is properly complete (which can cause the mediator to decline the case as premature), submitting a file that lacks the documentary evidence a mediator needs to assess the dispute, and accepting a partial resolution without understanding what it does or does not cover. There is also a language and translation risk on Amazon IT specifically – submissions in Italian require precision that automated translation does not reliably provide. Each of these errors can close off options that would otherwise remain open. DSA seller rights and P2B obligations are specific enough that the framing of the submission matters significantly.

Do I need a lawyer for mediation under eu marketplace rules?

There is no formal requirement for legal representation in P2B mediation. A seller can file independently. The practical question is whether the preparation and submission are strong enough to move the process forward. Mediation under EU marketplace rules engages P2B Regulation obligations, DSA statement-of-reasons requirements, and potentially DMA gatekeeper conduct – these are specific legal instruments, and a submission that does not engage them precisely tends to produce a slower, less defined response from Amazon's side. Attorney-led preparation is not a formality; it is the mechanism by which the procedural leverage the rules provide is actually used. We work with Amazon IT sellers on a fixed-fee basis for this work, quoted after a short review of the file.

About Tutamen

Tutamen is an independent law firm for online marketplace sellers. We represent Amazon, Walmart, Etsy and eBay sellers in account deactivations, frozen-funds recovery, intellectual-property disputes, arbitration and Notices of Dispute, and US federal Schedule A defense, plus EU marketplace regulation. Our work is attorney-led and confidential, with fees quoted up front. We act for founders, brand owners and in-house teams who need a specialist for a marketplace dispute. Our EU practice covers the full range of P2B, DSA, and DMA rights for sellers on Amazon IT and other EU surfaces. To discuss your situation, email info@tutamenlaw.com.

Byline: Claire Donnelly – arbitration & disputes analyst, Tutamen.

Disclaimer: This article is general information, not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Marketplace policies and the law change, and every account and case is different. For advice on your situation, contact Tutamen at info@tutamenlaw.com.