Skip to content
EU AI Act · EU-AI-ACT-ART-10-DATA-GOVERNANCE

EU AI Act Article 10 — Data and data governance

Providers of high-risk AI systems must ensure that covered datasets meet applicable quality and governance requirements; non-training systems are covered for testing datasets

HIGHRequirementData processingBinding regulationPassed, not yet in forceEnforceable from 2 December 2027

Where this comes from

Provision: Article 10 — Data and data governance

Instrument: EU Artificial Intelligence Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689)

Citation: Article 10, Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

Text version: Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, Articles 10 and 113 as amended by Regulation (EU) 2026/1744

Read the official text ↗

Who it applies to

High-risk AI provider in scope — all of these:

  • Article 10 assessed high-risk classification: YES
  • AI Act role is Provider or we provide some AI systems and deploy others

…unless:

  • AI Act scope exclusion is used exclusively for military, defence or national-security purposes or developed and used solely for scientific research and development
  • Art. 2(3): the Regulation 'does not apply to AI systems where and in so far as they are placed on the market, put into service, or used with or without modification exclusively for military, defence or national security purposes'. (AI Act Art. 2(3))
  • Art. 2(6): the Regulation 'does not apply to AI systems or AI models, including their output, specifically developed and put into service for the sole purpose of scientific research and development'. (AI Act Art. 2(6))
  • Art. 6(3): an Annex III system is NOT high-risk where it does not pose a significant risk of harm to health, safety or fundamental rights, including by not materially influencing the outcome of decision making — which applies where the system (a) performs... (AI Act Art. 6(3))

Scope in the source's own terms

  • Art. 2(1): the AI system is placed on the market or put into service in the Union, or the provider/deployer is established in the Union, or the output produced by the system is used in the Union
  • Assess Article 6(1), including paragraphs 1a-1c and Article 2(2) sectoral treatment, or Article 6(2)/Annex III with Article 6(3). A broad sector answer alone does not establish high-risk classification.
  • Article 16(a): this duty belongs to providers. Authorised representatives have separate Article 22 duties; representative status alone does not make them providers.

What engineering work it implies

  • Training Data Governance Record (Datasheet + Bias Assessment)Covers it fully

    A per-dataset data card covering the Article 10(2) governance practices, plus a bias-assessment checklist and a pipeline gate that blocks a training run when the card...

Sample acceptance criteria Landfall generates for this obligation:

  • Training/validation/test datasets are documented (source, scope, known gaps)
  • Data-quality and representativeness checks run and are recorded
  • Bias detection is performed and material findings are mitigated
  • Dataset versions are tracked and linked to model/system versions
  • A subgroup too small for a meaningful bias metric is reported as insufficient data, not as passing

Evidence an auditor expects

  • Process recordDocument reviewRetain Apply Art. 18(1) to documentation within its scope: 10 years after placing on the market or putting into service. This is not blanket retention of underlying datasets or personal data.

    Data governance record for the training, validation and testing data sets (Art. 10(2))

    Per-data-set record covering each Art. 10(2) practice: relevant design choices; data collection processes and the ORIGIN of the data (and, for personal data, the original purpose of collection); data-preparation operations (annotation, labelling, cleaning, updating, enrichment, aggregation); the assumptions formulated about what the data is meant to measure and represent; an assessment of availability, quantity and suitability; examination, prevention and mitigation of relevant biases; and identification and treatment of relevant data gaps

  • Assessment documentDocument reviewReviewed Suggested internal control: review on retraining or material dataset change

    Bias examination and mitigation record (Art. 10(2)(f)-(g))

    Documented examination of possible biases likely to affect health and safety, negatively impact fundamental rights, or lead to discrimination prohibited under Union law, together with the measures taken to prevent and mitigate them. Where special categories of personal data were processed for bias detection and correction, the Art. 4a(1) conditions and safeguards (following Regulation (EU) 2026/1744) must be evidenced

  • Test resultsTechnical audit

    Data-set quality evidence against Art. 10(3)-(4)

    Evidence that data sets are relevant, sufficiently representative, and to the best extent possible free of errors and complete in view of the intended purpose, with the statistical properties and the geographical, contextual, behavioural or functional setting characteristics required by Art. 10(4)

Questions people ask

Does EU AI Act Article 10 — Data and data governance apply to my service?
It applies when Article 10 assessed high-risk classification: YES; AI Act role is Provider or we provide some AI systems and deploy others. It does not apply where AI Act scope exclusion is used exclusively for military, defence or national-security purposes or developed and used solely for scientific research and development.
When does this become enforceable?
EU AI Act Article 10 — Data and data governance is enforceable from 2 December 2027. Its current status is: passed, not yet in force.
What evidence does an auditor expect?
Data governance record for the training, validation and testing data sets (Art. 10(2)); Bias examination and mitigation record (Art. 10(2)(f)-(g)); Data-set quality evidence against Art. 10(3)-(4).

Find out whether this one lands on you

Landfall's pre-scan answers the applicability question above for your product in minutes, then turns every obligation that applies into traceable engineering tickets with a citation chain your auditors can follow.

Not legal advice. Landfall maps regulatory obligations to engineering work for planning purposes. Its verdicts are not legal advice and create no attorney-client relationship — verify with qualified counsel before relying on them.

What Landfall Is NOT

Critical Boundaries

Understanding these boundaries is essential before using this product. Misuse of this tool for purposes outside its scope may create legal, regulatory, or commercial risk for your organization.

NOT Legal Advice

This product does not provide legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Interpretations are informational analysis, not legal counsel. Always consult qualified legal professionals for compliance decisions.

NOT a Risk Score

We do not quantify, calculate, or certify your compliance risk level.

No numerical risk rating, compliance percentage, or safety score. Risk assessment requires human judgment about your specific context.

NOT Runtime Enforcement

This is a planning and mapping tool, not a runtime enforcement system.

Does not integrate with your production systems. Does not block, filter, or enforce compliance in real-time. Implementation is your responsibility.

NOT Regulatory Approval

Using this tool does not mean you are compliant with any regulation.

No certification, seal of approval, or compliance guarantee. Regulators will evaluate your actual implementation, not your use of this tool.

NOT Authoritative Interpretation

Our interpretations are not binding and may differ from regulatory guidance.

Only regulators and courts provide authoritative interpretation. Our analysis reflects our reading of requirements, which may be incomplete or incorrect.

NOT a Safe Harbor

This tool does not shield you from enforcement actions or liability.

Documentation of your process is valuable, but does not constitute a legal defense. Compliance is ultimately your organization's responsibility.

NOT an AI Compliance Agent

AI features assist analysis but do not make compliance decisions for you.

AI-generated interpretations require human review and approval. Automated suggestions are starting points, not final answers.

NOT Complete Coverage

We do not cover all regulations, all obligations, or all jurisdictions.

Regulatory landscape is vast and evolving. Gaps in our coverage do not mean those requirements don't apply to you.

What This Tool IS:

  • A structured workflow for mapping regulatory requirements to implementation tasks
  • A documentation system for compliance decisions (audit trail)
  • A collaboration platform for compliance, legal, and engineering teams
  • An informational resource for understanding regulatory obligations