Connected Automated Driving: Civil Liability Regulation in the European Union

Olga Shevchenko

DOI: https://doi.org/10.15388/teise.2020.114.5

2020-04-05

Teisė

Abstract:The aim of this article is to provide with the option of civil liability regulation of connected autonomous vehicles (CAVs) and autonomous vehicles (AVs) at the European Union level in the light of introduction of Connected Automated Driving (CAD) on the common market.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Autonomous and Automated Vehicles in Germany and Hungary, with Special Attention to the Question of Civil Liability

Béla Csitei

DOI: https://doi.org/10.47745/ausleg.2021.10.1.04

2021-08-01

Acta Universitatis Sapientiae Legal Studies

Abstract:The most frequent questions associated with autonomous vehicles both in the world press and in legal literature are those that look for the answer as to who is responsible for the accidents caused by these machines. However, only a few such questions deal with the issue that all factums apply different definitions, and the terminology is the basis of applying the particular factum. So, among others, answering the question is inevitable as to whether the autonomous or automated vehicle can be considered a ‘vehicle’, or the human sitting in the car can be considered the ‘driver’. If we decide not to consider the autonomous vehicle to be a vehicle, and – ad absurdum – we create an independent, sui generis category of vehicles, then the legal factums regarding the definition of the vehicle will not be applicable to the factum concerning the history of autonomous vehicles; however, their applicability will surely be questioned. With regard to this, I focus in my study on how the German Road Traffic Act (Straßenverkehrsgesetz) accommodates more advanced automated vehicles, and after this I compare the Hungarian and German rules that are relevant in terms of civil liability if we study the vehicles in question.
Grounding the case for a European approach to the regulation of automated driving: the technology-selection effect of liability rules

Andrea Bertolini,Massimo Riccaboni

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-020-09671-5

2020-11-20

European Journal of Law and Economics

Abstract:Abstract In the current paper, we discuss the need for regulation at EU level of Connected and Automated Driving solutions (henceforth CAD) based on multiple considerations, namely (i) the need for uniformity of criteria across European Member States, and (ii) the impact that regulation—or the absence of it—has on the proliferation of specific technological solutions. The analysis is grounded on legal and economic considerations of possible interactions between vehicles with different levels of automation, and shows how the existing framework delays innovation. A Risk-Management Approach, identifying one sole responsible party ex ante (one-stop-shop), liable under all circumstances—pursuant to a strict, if not absolute liability rule—is to be preferred. We analyse the solution adopted by some Member States in light of those considerations and conclude that none truly corresponds to a RMA approach, and differences will also cause market fragmentation. We conclude that because legal rules determine what kind of technological application is favoured over others—and thence they are not technology-neutral—uniformity across MSs is of essential relevance, and discuss possible policy approaches to be adopted at European level.

economics,law
Sustainable Data Governance for Cooperative, Connected and Automated Mobility in the European Union

Jozef Andraško,Ondrej Hamuľák,Matúš Mesarčík,Tanel Kerikmäe,Aleksi Kajander

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su131910610

IF: 3.9

2021-09-24

Sustainability

Abstract:The article focuses on the issue of data governance in connected vehicles through a novel analysis of current legal frameworks in the European Union. The analysis of relevant legislation, judicial decisions, and doctrines is supplemented by discussions relating to associated sustainability issues. Relevant notions of autonomous vehicles are analyzed, and a respective legal framework is introduced. Although fully automated vehicles are a matter for the future, the time to regulate is now. The European Union aims to create cooperative, connected, and automated mobility based on cooperation between different interconnected types of machinery. The essence of the system is data flow, as data governance in connected vehicles is one of the most intensively discussed themes nowadays. This triggers a need to analyze relevant legal frameworks in connection with fundamental rights and freedoms. Replacing human decision-making with artificial intelligence has the capacity to erode long-held and protected social and cultural values, such as the autonomy of individuals as has already been in evidence in legislation. Finally, the article deals with the issue of responsibility and liability of different actors involved in processing personal data according to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) applied to the environment of connected and automated vehicle (CAV) smart infrastructure. Based on a definition and analysis of three model situations, we point out that in several cases of processing personal data within the CAV, it proves extremely demanding to determine the liable entity, due to the functional and relatively broad interpretation of the concept of joint controllers, in terms of the possibility of converging decisions on the purposes and means of processing within the vehicles discussed.

environmental sciences,environmental studies,green & sustainable science & technology
Consumer Protection Against Defects in Automated Vehicles

Alejandro Zornoza Somolinos

DOI: https://doi.org/10.54648/eulr2023011

2023-01-01

European Business Law Review

Abstract:European driving liability has been built around compulsory insurance and its six Directives. Based on strict liability, the question ‘Who must respond for harms caused in an accident when an automated vehicle is involved’ is so popular as needless: whoever creates the risk putting the automated vehicle on the road must assume liability for the damage created. Broadly considering that an automated vehicle is a technological product, and therefore fallible, this work approaches the research of automated vehicles and their liability regime from the comparative perspective of the European consumer protection, without losing sight of the compulsory insurance regime, and answers the following questions: Does the defective product liability regime apply to automated vehicles? Can a software defect be equated with a construction defect? Are persons on board an automated vehicle users of a product/service or can they be considered drivers and occupants?
Regulations for on-road testing of connected and automated vehicles: Assessing the potential for global safety harmonization

Dasom Lee,David J. Hess

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2020.03.026

2020-06-01

Abstract:<p>Although there is great media attention to connected and automated vehicles (CAVs) and strong public interest in the technology, it is still under development. Their deployment to the broader public will require new regulations and road traffic rules that are also under development, and there is not yet a globally harmonized approach. This paper reviews the main safety and liability issues for CAVs with a focus on the rules developed for on-road testing to date in Australia, the United States, and Germany. It also reviews government policies from Victoria, Australia, and California, the United States, and it provides an appendix on European Union (E.U.) regulations. After a review of similarities and differences regarding safety and liability provisions, the study suggests how the current provisions can be brought together toward a globally harmonized approach to safety issues that builds on best practices in the three countries.</p>
Reflections on Civil Liability and Autonomous Vehicles

Emanuela Maio

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7590/187714624x17132716463919

2024-06-17

European Journal of Commercial Contract Law

Abstract:The essay focuses on civil liability profiles in the event that an accident is caused by an autonomous vehicle and the third damaged party claims against the driver. The author begins with a reconstruction of the current legal framework first in Europe and then in Italy and the US, and explains the different theories that could be applied to the problem as a solution. The work provides a proposal, ie the recognition of legal personality given to the autonomous vehicle, not as a surrogate of the natural person, but as a legal person (see for example private entities). The author shows how this is possible using the method of ana- logia iuris.
Approaches to Autonomous Driving Vehicle Traffic Accidents Liability in China

Bo Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.54254/2753-7048/26/20230901

2023-11-28

Abstract:Autonomous driving technology, as another major revolution in the field of transportation technology, brings new challenges to the provisions of the current legal system. Whether the autonomous vehicle can become the subject responsible for traffic accidents, whether the manufacturer of autonomous vehicle should bear the responsibility, and how to identify the drivers responsibility have become difficult problems in the process of responsibility identification. To solve the above issues, this paper conducts a comparative analysis of US and UK autonomous vehicle regulations, incorporating Chinas existing traffic laws, to propose a classification standard for autonomous vehicle traffic accident liability in the Chinese context. This research proposed framework hinges on two principles. Firstly, it differentiates between driving assistance and full autonomous driving, applying existing traffic accident tort liability rules during driving assistance, with manufacturer liability for technology failures. In contrast, autonomous driving warrants manufacturer product liability. Secondly, framework distinguishes between human and autonomous driving, determining liability based on the vehicles operating mode at the time of an accident. Users are liable if they didnt engage autonomous mode or intervened, while accidents in full autonomous mode invoke manufacturer product liability. Recognizing flaws in the product liability system, such as delayed compensation and high litigation costs, we propose introducing a liability insurance system. This multifaceted approach safeguards victims and mitigates risks in the evolving autonomous driving landscape.

Engineering,Law
Governing autonomous vehicles: emerging responses for safety, liability, privacy, cybersecurity, and industry risks

Araz Taeihagh,Hazel Si Min Lim

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1807.05720

2018-07-16

Computers and Society

Abstract:The benefits of autonomous vehicles (AVs) are widely acknowledged, but there are concerns about the extent of these benefits and AV risks and unintended consequences. In this article, we first examine AVs and different categories of the technological risks associated with them. We then explore strategies that can be adopted to address these risks, and explore emerging responses by governments for addressing AV risks. Our analyses reveal that, thus far, governments have in most instances avoided stringent measures in order to promote AV developments and the majority of responses are non-binding and focus on creating councils or working groups to better explore AV implications. The US has been active in introducing legislations to address issues related to privacy and cybersecurity. The UK and Germany, in particular, have enacted laws to address liability issues, other countries mostly acknowledge these issues, but have yet to implement specific strategies. To address privacy and cybersecurity risks strategies ranging from introduction or amendment of non-AV specific legislation to creating working groups have been adopted. Much less attention has been paid to issues such as environmental and employment risks, although a few governments have begun programmes to retrain workers who might be negatively affected.
Legal Mechanisms to Regulate Civil Liability for Actions of Artificial Intelligence in the Russian Federation and European Union Law

Ksenya Kondrateva,Timur Nikitin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17589/2309-8678-2021-9-3-60-82

2021-09-29

Russian Law Journal

Abstract:In this article authors discuss existing ideas about liability of artificial intelligence based on guilty and strict approaches to defining the elements of civil liability in the Russian Federation and European Union. These approaches have drawbacks, which are, first of all, in the excessive limitation of the development of innovations, and with low efficiency in achieving the goals of civil legal responsibility and the implementation of its functions. The risk-based approach proposed by the author to the determination of the elements of civil liability for the actions of artificial intelligence is intended to neutralize the named drawbacks. Based on the analysis of the spheres of application and artificial intelligence technology, the risk-based approach allows a more efficient and flexible approach to the definition of the subject of responsibility, its types and limits, ensuring a balance between the development of innovation and the goals of civil liability. As a result of the study, the author’s definition of a risk-based approach to civil liability for the actions of artificial intelligence has been given, its features, elements have been disclosed, and its advantages over existing approaches to civil liability have been demonstrated.
The Twofold Role of Legal Liability Misattribution on Intention to Buy Automated Vehicles: A Survey in China

Evangelos Paschalidis,Siming Zhai,Junhua Guo,Tangjian Wei,Peng Liu,Haibo Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2212220

IF: 4.92

2023-06-10

International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction

Abstract:Liability attribution for crashes involving automated vehicles (AVs), if applied improperly, is a factor which can potentially hinder acceptance. The present study investigated the impact of liability attribution on intention to buy an AV. A vignette-based survey was implemented with a hypothetical crash similar to the 2018 Uber crash (which was jointly caused by driver distraction and the malfunctioning of the automated system) leading to a pedestrian's fatality. Respondents ( N = 1524) chose their preferred liability attribution, ranging from human driver exclusively liable to AV manufacturer exclusively liable. Respondents were then randomly allocated to different conditions of actual liability attribution by the local authority. These conditions were then combined into, negative misattribution (the authority assigned more liability to the human driver, compared to the respondent), positive misattribution (the authority assigned less liability to the human driver), and no misattribution. Negative misattribution negatively affected intention to buy; however, positive misattribution did not have a significant impact. The results of a multiple-mediator model indicated that negative misattribution affects intention to buy through the mediating effects of trust, negative affect, and crash acceptability. Theoretical and practical implications of our results are discussed.

computer science, cybernetics,ergonomics
Automated Driving and Product Liability

Bryant Walker Smith

2016-10-01

Abstract:This Article focuses on one cyberphysical domain — automated driving — to methodically analyze the so-called liability problem. It considers how automated driving could affect product liability, how product liability could affect automated driving, and how each could advance or impede the prevention of injury and the compensation of victims.

Computer Science,Law,Business
Responsibility for crashes of autonomous vehicles: an ethical analysis

Alexander Hevelke,Julian Nida-Rümelin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-014-9565-5

Abstract:A number of companies including Google and BMW are currently working on the development of autonomous cars. But if fully autonomous cars are going to drive on our roads, it must be decided who is to be held responsible in case of accidents. This involves not only legal questions, but also moral ones. The first question discussed is whether we should try to design the tort liability for car manufacturers in a way that will help along the development and improvement of autonomous vehicles. In particular, Patrick Lin's concern that any security gain derived from the introduction of autonomous cars would constitute a trade-off in human lives will be addressed. The second question is whether it would be morally permissible to impose liability on the user based on a duty to pay attention to the road and traffic and to intervene when necessary to avoid accidents. Doubts about the moral legitimacy of such a scheme are based on the notion that it is a form of defamation if a person is held to blame for causing the death of another by his inattention if he never had a real chance to intervene. Therefore, the legitimacy of such an approach would depend on the user having an actual chance to do so. The last option discussed in this paper is a system in which a person using an autonomous vehicle has no duty (and possibly no way) of interfering, but is still held (financially, not criminally) responsible for possible accidents. Two ways of doing so are discussed, but only one is judged morally feasible.
Autonomous Cars and Tort Liability

Kyle J. Colonna

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2325879

2012-09-22

Abstract:With the passing of time, cars are becoming more autonomous and independent of human intervention. However, with this shift in control from humans to technology, there also comes a shift in liability. While autonomous cars will eliminate many accidents caused by human error, many others will result due to technological malfunctions. In order to ensure that autonomous cars enter the marketplace in a timely fashion, the liability of autonomous car manufacturers requires mitigation. This Note examines the legal issues surrounding autonomous cars, including tort liability, and proposes a means by which the liability issues surrounding autonomous cars may be fashioned in order to effectuate a timely implementation of autonomous cars in the marketplace.

Engineering,Business,Law
The Awkward Middle for Automated Vehicles: Liability Attribution Rules When Humans and Computers Share Driving Responsibilities

William H. Widen,Philip Koopman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4444854

2023-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:This essay describes a state statute which establishes when a human occupant of an automated vehicle has contributory negligence for her interactions with a driving automation system. Existing law is an insufficient basis for addressing the question of liability when a driving automation system intentionally places some burden for safe operation of an automated vehicle on a human driver. Without further statutory guidance, leaving resolution to the courts will likely significantly delay legal certainty by creating inefficient and potentially inconsistent results across jurisdictions due to the technological complexity of the area. To provide legal certainty, the approach recommended uses four operational modes: testing, autonomous, supervisory, and conventional. Transition rules for transfer of responsibility from machine to human clarify at what times a computer driver or human driver has primary responsibility for avoiding or mitigating harm. Importantly, specifying clear parameters for a finding of contributory negligence prevents the complexity of machine/human interactions from creating an over-broad liability shield. Such a shield could deprive deserving plaintiffs of appropriate recoveries when a computer driver exhibits behavior that would be negligent if a human driver were to drive in a similar manner.
Ethical Issues, Cybersecurity and Automated Vehicles

Sara Landini

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27386-6_14

2019-12-05

Abstract:The digitalization of mobility and the associated increase of data are creating new requirements to be met by vehicle safety and infrastructure in a way to satisfy the requirements of the protection of personal rights and freedoms of data subjects. Automated and connected autonomous vehicles and driving systems (CAVs) require clear cybersecurity and data protection requirements. CAVs are under the obligation to perform their functions safely and reliably across national borders. As the automation and interconnectivity of driving functions increases, the issues of data encryption and cybersecurity will become more important. The rights to individual mobility data, which will emerge, will accordingly need to be clearly regulated.This chapter aims to show the benefits and threats associated with the use of automated cars, starting from the definition of automation and self-learning machines. Interventions are reported in terms of legislation and guidelines in Community law. The chapter discusses ethical issues in relation to the use of autonomous vehicles (AVs) and cybersecurity aspects affecting the use of AVs. The chapter concludes by highlighting the importance of giving relevance to the decision-making autonomy of machines in regulation.
Research on tort liability of autonomous vehicle

DOI: https://doi.org/10.59825/jcs.2024.2.7.65

2024-07-31

Abstract:作为人工智能发展的新型产品,自动驾驶汽车为我们生活带来了更便捷、智能的驾驶体验,但其引发的交通事故对我国《民法典》机动车交通事故责任相关规定带来许多挑战,在技术、安全、隐私等方面引发了诸多问题,也对机动车交通事故责任、产品责任及二者发生竞合情况下的归责原则提出前所未有的挑战。原有的“驾驶员责任+产品责任的”归责模式被打破,追责的重心逐渐向产品责任转移,事故发生的原因也逐步由人的过错转移到车辆自身的缺陷问题。相较于传统的机动车交通事故责任,自动驾驶汽车事故侵权主体认定、因果关系、责任划分等多个要件认定带来挑战,此时不仅需要用传统的交通事故处理规则来对驾驶员操作不当进行规制,还应利用严格的产品责任惩戒产品缺陷,推动企业持续科技创新。急需以现有的法律法规为基础,探索自动驾驶汽车交通事故规制新路径。
Automated Driving: Liability of the Software Producer and the Producer of the Automated Vehicle

Nynke Vellinga

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3567779

2019-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:Even though automated vehicles are expected to bring great safety benefits, accidents will still occur with automated vehicles. An automated vehicle could be equipped with self-learning software (reinforcement learning), which learns whilst driving. This software could make a ‘learning error’ and, for instance, not recognize worn-down lane markings as such. Is the producer of the automated vehicle liable for the damage caused by this ‘learning error’? And what if the damage is not caused by a ‘learning error’, but by a glitch in a software update, can the producer of the automated vehicle be held liable for the damage caused? And is such a software update a product? In this paper, the challenges posed by automated driving to the European Product Liability Directive will be discussed. The legal position of the software producer as well as the legal position of the producer of the automated vehicle are explored in order to find answers to the questions mentioned.
Legal Liability for Unmanned Aerial Vehicle

Ji-Yong Oh,

DOI: https://doi.org/10.34267/cbstl.2022.13.1.147

2022-06-30

LAW RESEARCH INSTITUTE CHUNGBUK NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

Abstract:The existing aircraft operator's liability, in which a person is involved in the operation of an aircraft, can be viewed as an intermediate liability or limited no-fault liability where the burden of proof is switched. However, the legal nature of the operator's liability for autonomous flying aircraft operated by the autonomous flight system should be considered differently from the existing one. In other words, the aircraft owner of an autonomous flying aircraft bears no-fault liability that cannot claim immunity even if the owner does not directly intervene in the operation of the aircraft. Therefore, the ‘force majeure’ exemption provision of Article 931, No. 4 of the Commercial Act, which is the immunity provision for aircraft operators, should be excluded from application in the case of autonomous flying aircraft. If an aircraft accident occurs due to the negligence of the victim, the aircraft owner cannot be held liable. Consequently, it is necessary to enact a special law for autonomous flying aircraft on no-fault liability that stipulates the above limiting factors as a condition subsequent. Until then, for the gap in regulation, it is reasonable to apply mutatis mutandis rules related to operation under the Compulsory Motor Vehicle Liability Security Act applicable to autonomous vehicles. This is because civil legal responsibilities related to the operation of autonomous flying aircraft are in line with civil legal responsibilities related to the driving of autonomous vehicles
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AS A BASIC PROBLEM WHEN IMPLEMENTING AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY IN EVERYDAY LIFE

Piotr CZECH

DOI: https://doi.org/10.20858/sjsutst.2024.122.3

2024-03-01

Abstract:Innovative technologies that use artificial intelligence in transport solutions recently emerging around the world include, among others issues of autonomous vehicle driving. The use of autonomous vehicle technology affects the issues of civil liability (liability and insurance), road safety, natural environment (energy efficiency, renewable energy sources), data (access, exchange, protection, privacy), IT infrastructure (effective and reliable communication), employment (creation and loss of jobs, training of truck drivers in the use of automated vehicles). The development of new technologies related to artificial intelligence, including autonomous vehicles, generates inevitable changes in law, economy and society. It is inevitable due to the fact that autonomy is undoubtedly a means to achieve the goal of improving the efficiency sought in every area of life. The article presents arguments confirming the thesis that the basic factor inhibiting the implementation of autonomous vehicle technology is the problem of artificial intelligence, including its definition and legal regulation.
Liability Rules for AI-Related Harm: Law and Economics Lessons for a European Approach

Shu Li,Michael Faure,Katri Havu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2022.26

2022-09-18

European Journal of Risk Regulation

Abstract:The potential of artificial intelligence (AI) has grown exponentially in recent years, which not only generates value but also creates risks. AI systems are characterised by their complexity, opacity and autonomy in operation. Now and in the foreseeable future, AI systems will be operating in a manner that is not fully autonomous. This signifies that providing appropriate incentives to the human parties involved is still of great importance in reducing AI-related harm. Therefore, liability rules should be adapted in such a way to provide the relevant parties with incentives to efficiently reduce the social costs of potential accidents. Relying on a law and economics approach, we address the theoretical question of what kind of liability rules should be applied to different parties along the value chain related to AI. In addition, we critically analyse the ongoing policy debates in the European Union, discussing the risk that European policymakers will fail to determine efficient liability rules with regard to different stakeholders.

Connected Automated Driving: Civil Liability Regulation in the European Union

Autonomous and Automated Vehicles in Germany and Hungary, with Special Attention to the Question of Civil Liability

Grounding the case for a European approach to the regulation of automated driving: the technology-selection effect of liability rules

Sustainable Data Governance for Cooperative, Connected and Automated Mobility in the European Union

Consumer Protection Against Defects in Automated Vehicles

Regulations for on-road testing of connected and automated vehicles: Assessing the potential for global safety harmonization

Reflections on Civil Liability and Autonomous Vehicles

Approaches to Autonomous Driving Vehicle Traffic Accidents Liability in China

Governing autonomous vehicles: emerging responses for safety, liability, privacy, cybersecurity, and industry risks

Legal Mechanisms to Regulate Civil Liability for Actions of Artificial Intelligence in the Russian Federation and European Union Law

The Twofold Role of Legal Liability Misattribution on Intention to Buy Automated Vehicles: A Survey in China

Automated Driving and Product Liability

Responsibility for crashes of autonomous vehicles: an ethical analysis

Autonomous Cars and Tort Liability

The Awkward Middle for Automated Vehicles: Liability Attribution Rules When Humans and Computers Share Driving Responsibilities

Ethical Issues, Cybersecurity and Automated Vehicles

Research on tort liability of autonomous vehicle

Automated Driving: Liability of the Software Producer and the Producer of the Automated Vehicle

Legal Liability for Unmanned Aerial Vehicle

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AS A BASIC PROBLEM WHEN IMPLEMENTING AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY IN EVERYDAY LIFE

Liability Rules for AI-Related Harm: Law and Economics Lessons for a European Approach