Access to certification cannot depend on the client's size, association membership or how many certificates the body has already issued.
What applies today
The policies, procedures and the way they are administered must not discriminate. Procedures cannot be used to block applicants except where the standard itself allows. The body must make its services available to every applicant whose activity falls inside the scope it operates. Access cannot be made conditional on the size of the client, membership of an association or group, or the number of certificates already issued, and there must be no undue financial or other conditions. The body may refuse an application or end a contract for a fundamental reason, such as illegal activity, a history of repeated non-compliance or a similar client-specific problem. The requirements, evaluation, review, decision and surveillance must stay within the matters related to the certification scope.
Why it matters
The clause protects the market from a certification body that quietly serves only large clients or members of one association. It also protects the body from being asked to certify outside its competence. The last sentence is the counterweight: non-discrimination does not mean accepting every request, because the body must still keep its work inside the scope it can actually assess.
The public FDIS contents lists clause 4.4 as Non-discriminatory conditions. The FDIS requirement wording is not held, so the requirement above is the 2012 text that applies until publication.
Where this clause lands in the revision
This is a general requirement. The public contents keeps its number and title, so the 2012 wording remains the basis of an assessment until the new edition is published. A first artefact an assessor commonly asks for here is current fee basis and access conditions. The party this touches first is The certification manager and the finance team who set fees and conditions.
What the assessor asks for
| Category | Artefact to have ready |
|---|---|
| Published conditions | Current fee basis and access conditions |
| Refusal log | Applications declined, with the reason and the decision maker |
| Scope statement | Accreditation scope and the internal rule that keeps work inside it |
| Client mix | Summary of client size and sector against the published conditions |
One common question. ask about a recent refusal and a small client. A refusal with no written reason is a finding even if the decision was right.
Common failures
- Fee conditions include a minimum turnover that is not in the scheme
- Applications from sole traders are routinely redirected without a recorded reason
- The body certifies outside the scope because a client asked and the work was close
Prepare before publication
Take the last ten declined or redirected applications and write the reason next to each. Keep the file for the assessment.
Dates that matter
The public record gives stage 50.20 on 4 August 2026 and voting to 27 October 2026. The planning date, 15 February 2027, is an estimate from that stage and not an ISO date, and clause 4.4 has no separate date.
Cross-references
4.1.2 Certification agreement · 4.6 Publicly available information · 7.3 Application review
Source
Source for 4.4: ISO/IEC 17065:2012, Clause 4.4, with the ISO/IEC FDIS 17065 public record. Our statement, not the instrument verbatim; the FDIS wording is not held.
Not legal advice; does not certify. A reading of the requirement and the evidence an assessor commonly samples, not a substitute for the standard or your accreditation body's rules.