Corrigendum notes should say whether a legal source was corrected or substantively amended

A corrigendum note should tell readers whether the cited legal source was corrected for an error or changed through a substantive amendment.

European legal sources often expose corrigenda as separate records. EUR-Lex, for example, has pages for corrigenda tied to regulations and other acts. A corrigendum can fix a mistake in the published text, including language or reference errors, while an amendment changes the legal content through a later act. For a non-lawyer reader, the difference is easy to miss but important for citation.

A useful note includes the base act, the corrigendum link, the affected article or annex if known, the language version if relevant, and the date checked. It should avoid saying “the law changed” when the record is a correction to the published text. It should also avoid saying “just a typo” without checking whether the correction affects obligations, thresholds, dates, or definitions.

The safest summary pattern is: original source, correction source, affected place, practical effect, and remaining uncertainty. If the practical effect is unknown, say that the corrigendum exists and needs legal review before being used for compliance decisions.

This keeps the source trail honest. It lets a reader see that the record was corrected without pretending that every correction is a new policy choice or that every correction is harmless.

Corrigendum notes should say whether a legal source was corrected or substantively amended

// COMMENTS

ON THIS PAGE