ExampleEditorialv1.0.0

Serious incident on the production line: who reports and within what deadline

A manufacturer supplies an AI system that runs as a safety component in a machine on the production line and at the same time drives quality control. At a customer's factory an operator is seriously injured after the machine failed to stop on an anomaly. The question is who reports, to whom, and which clock is already running at that moment.

The official source remains authoritative. This is general information about obligations and not legal advice. See this object on the map

Address and citation

This object has an address of its own that is never renamed or reused. Store the identifier in your own file, not the title or the link.

Identifier: praxikon:eu:ai-act:example:example-ernstig-incident-productielijn-meldtermijn
Payload hash (sha256): ebe7b7020fc00e471f22844f0b97ed3e30f6702e78b04c376cd86720ec3d51bd

Citation line

Praxikon, "Serious incident on the production line: who reports and within what deadline", praxikon:eu:ai-act:example:example-ernstig-incident-productielijn-meldtermijn@1.0.0, dataset praxikon:sys:registry:dataset:ai-act-implementation-graph 2.1.0 (schema 1.4.0), effective_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z, known_at 2026-08-14T00:00:00.000Z, sha256 ebe7b7020fc00e471f22844f0b97ed3e30f6702e78b04c376cd86720ec3d51bd

Version: 1.0.0
Legal time (effective_at): 1 August 2024
Knowledge time (known_at): 8 August 2026
Closed on: Not closed
Topics: examples

Review status: Placed against the official source (8 August 2026). Next check due by 4 February 2027. The check date is the knowledge date of this version; no later recheck has been recorded.

What this object links to

Every relation appears below as a path: from the source with its locator, through the conditions and exceptions of the object carrying the relation, to the consequence. A locator belongs to a statement in the data and not to a relation, so the source is the source anchor of the carrying object.

The obligation this hangs off

1 of 1 shown

The object belongs to this obligation. The source line it hangs off sits there.

Source
Official fact on this object, with its locator.
- EU Artificial Intelligence Act 2024/1689
  Locator: Article 73(1), (2), (4) and (6), and Article 26(5)
  praxikon:eu:ai-act:source:reg-eu-2024-1689
  Open official source
Via
No condition or exception recorded on this object.
Consequence
- ObligationArticle 73: serious incident reporting
  praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:article-73-incident-reporting

What this object is about

2 of 2 shown

The object is about this role. Undifferentiated: it does not follow that the duty rests on this role.

Source
Official fact on this object, with its locator.
- EU Artificial Intelligence Act 2024/1689
  Locator: Article 73(1), (2), (4) and (6), and Article 26(5)
  praxikon:eu:ai-act:source:reg-eu-2024-1689
  Open official source
Via
No condition or exception recorded on this object.
Consequence
- ActorDeployer
  praxikon:eu:ai-act:actor:deployer
- ActorProvider of an AI system
  praxikon:eu:ai-act:actor:provider

What this object states

Official fact

Attributable to a named primary source, with a locator. Where they differ, the official source prevails.

Article 73(1) places the reporting of serious incidents on the provider of the high-risk AI system placed on the Union market, addressed to the market surveillance authorities of the Member State where the incident occurred. Article 73(2) requires that report to be made immediately after the provider has established a causal link between the AI system and the serious incident, or the reasonable likelihood of such a link, and in any event no later than 15 days after the provider or, where applicable, the deployer becomes aware of the incident, with the reporting period taking account of the severity of the incident. Article 73(4) shortens that to no later than 10 days in the event of the death of a person. Article 73(6) obliges the provider, following the report, to perform the necessary investigations without delay, including a risk assessment and corrective action, and not to perform any investigation involving alteration of the AI system in a way that may affect the subsequent evaluation of the causes of the incident without first informing the competent authorities. Article 26(5) requires a deployer that has identified a serious incident to inform, immediately, first the provider and then the importer or distributor and the relevant market surveillance authorities, and makes Article 73 apply mutatis mutandis where the deployer cannot reach the provider.
- Locator: Article 73(1), (2), (4) and (6), and Article 26(5)praxikon:eu:ai-act:source:reg-eu-2024-1689Open official source

Our interpretation

Our own reading. It can change without the law changing, and it is not the position of a supervisory authority.

We read Article 73(2) as meaning that the clock can already start at the deployer on the factory floor, while the report under Article 73(1) sits with you as the provider of the AI system. That does not leave your customer free to sit still: Article 26(5) gives the deployer a notification route of its own, running past you, the importer or distributor and the market surveillance authority, and makes Article 73 apply mutatis mutandis if you cannot be reached. Fix that route in the contract and in the service line before anything happens. Where an operator is seriously injured but does not die, we read the outer limit of Article 73(2) as the one in play rather than the 10 days of Article 73(4); how much sooner than that outer limit you must report is left open by the text and turns on severity. Bear in mind as well that the reflex to repair the machine immediately and resume production can collide with Article 73(6), because an investigation that alters the system first requires notice to the competent authority. Working that out only during the incident costs days that these deadlines do not allow.
- Locator: Article 73(1), (2), (4) and (6), and Article 26(5)praxikon:eu:ai-act:source:reg-eu-2024-1689Open official source

When this applies

No condition recorded on this object.

When this does not apply

No exception recorded on this object.

Referring to this object

Citation block

Copy this reference into your advice, article or file. The identifier, the version and the hash keep the statement findable later, even once the dataset has moved on.

Reference

Praxikon, "Serious incident on the production line: who reports and within what deadline",
praxikon:eu:ai-act:example:example-ernstig-incident-productielijn-meldtermijn@1.0.0,
dataset praxikon:sys:registry:dataset:ai-act-implementation-graph 2.1.0 (schema 1.4.0),
effective_at 2024-08-01T00:00:00.000Z, known_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z,
sha256 ebe7b7020fc00e471f22844f0b97ed3e30f6702e78b04c376cd86720ec3d51bd,
https://www.praxikon.com/en/verkenner/example/example-ernstig-incident-productielijn-meldtermijn
(https://www.praxikon.com/api/v1/entities?id=praxikon%3Aeu%3Aai-act%3Aexample%3Aexample-ernstig-incident-productielijn-meldtermijn&effective_at=2024-08-01&known_at=2026-08-08&lang=en, accessed 2026-08-25)

Short form

praxikon:eu:ai-act:example:example-ernstig-incident-productielijn-meldtermijn@1.0.0 (sha256 ebe7b702)

BibTeX

@misc{praxikon-eu-ai-act-example-example-ernstig-incident-productielijn-meldtermijn-1-0-0,
  author       = {{Praxikon}},
  title        = {Serious incident on the production line: who reports and within what deadline},
  year         = {2026},
  version      = {1.0.0},
  number       = {praxikon:eu:ai-act:example:example-ernstig-incident-productielijn-meldtermijn},
  howpublished = {AI Act Change \& Evidence Graph, dataset 2.1.0, schema 1.4.0},
  note         = {effective_at 2024-08-01T00:00:00.000Z; known_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z; sha256 ebe7b7020fc00e471f22844f0b97ed3e30f6702e78b04c376cd86720ec3d51bd},
  url          = {https://www.praxikon.com/en/verkenner/example/example-ernstig-incident-productielijn-meldtermijn},
  urldate      = {2026-08-25},
  language     = {en}
}

CSL JSON

[
  {
    "id": "praxikon:eu:ai-act:example:example-ernstig-incident-productielijn-meldtermijn@1.0.0",
    "type": "dataset",
    "title": "Serious incident on the production line: who reports and within what deadline",
    "container-title": "AI Act Change & Evidence Graph",
    "publisher": "Praxikon",
    "version": "1.0.0",
    "number": "praxikon:eu:ai-act:example:example-ernstig-incident-productielijn-meldtermijn",
    "URL": "https://www.praxikon.com/en/verkenner/example/example-ernstig-incident-productielijn-meldtermijn",
    "language": "en",
    "issued": {
      "date-parts": [
        [
          2026,
          8,
          8
        ]
      ]
    },
    "accessed": {
      "date-parts": [
        [
          2026,
          8,
          25
        ]
      ]
    },
    "note": "dataset praxikon:sys:registry:dataset:ai-act-implementation-graph 2.1.0; schema 1.4.0; effective_at 2024-08-01T00:00:00.000Z; known_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z; sha256 ebe7b7020fc00e471f22844f0b97ed3e30f6702e78b04c376cd86720ec3d51bd; retrieved_from https://www.praxikon.com/api/v1/entities?id=praxikon%3Aeu%3Aai-act%3Aexample%3Aexample-ernstig-incident-productielijn-meldtermijn&effective_at=2024-08-01&known_at=2026-08-08&lang=en; licence https://www.praxikon.com/nl/legal/terms"
  }
]

How to verify a reference later is set out in the methodology. Terms

For agents and integrations

This page and the machine output come from the same object and the same two time axes.

Open as JSON Open as JSON-LD Read the methodology