Abstract:The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into healthcare in Africa presents transformative opportunities but also raises profound legal challenges, especially concerning liability. As AI becomes more autonomous, determining who or what is responsible when things go wrong becomes ambiguous. This article aims to review the legal concepts relevant to the issue of liability for harm caused by AI in healthcare. While some suggest attributing legal personhood to AI as a potential solution, the feasibility of this remains controversial. The principal-agent relationship, where the physician is held responsible for AI decisions, risks reducing the adoption of AI tools due to potential liabilities. Similarly, using product law to establish liability is problematic because of the dynamic learning nature of AI, which deviates from static products. This fluidity complicates traditional definitions of product defects and, by extension, where responsibility lies. Exploring alternatives, risk-based determinations of liability, which focus on potential hazards rather than on specific fault assignments, emerges as a potential pathway. However, these, too, present challenges in assigning accountability. Strict liability has been proposed as another avenue. It can simplify the compensation process for victims by focusing on the harm rather than on the fault. Yet, concerns arise over the economic impact on stakeholders, the potential for unjust reputational damage, and the feasibility of a global application. Instead of approaches based on liability, reconciliation holds much promise to facilitate regulatory sandboxes. In conclusion, while the integration of AI systems into healthcare holds vast potential, it necessitates a re-evaluation of our legal frameworks. The central challenge is how to adapt traditional concepts of liability to the novel and unpredictable nature of AI-or to move away from liability towards reconciliation. Future discussions and research must navigate these complex waters and seek solutions that ensure both progress and protection.

Is Artificial Intelligence (AI) a Pipe Dream? Why Legal Issues Present Significant Hurdles to AI Autonomy

AI in radiology: Legal responsibilities and the car paradox

AI in Radiology: Navigating Medical Responsibility

The future of artificial intelligence in medicine: Medical-legal considerations for health leaders

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they won't side with the plaintiff: Examining perceptions of liability about AI in radiology

Developing, Purchasing, Implementing and Monitoring AI Tools in Radiology: Practical Considerations. A Multi-Society Statement from the ACR, CAR, ESR, RANZCR and RSNA

Advantages, Challenges, and Risks of Artificial Intelligence for Radiologists

Liability for harm caused by AI in healthcare: an overview of the core legal concepts

Developing, purchasing, implementing and monitoring AI tools in radiology: practical considerations. A multi-society statement from the ACR, CAR, ESR, RANZCR & RSNA

Autonomous AI systems in the face of liability, regulations and costs

Developing, purchasing, implementing and monitoring AI tools in radiology: Practical considerations. A multi‐society statement from the ACR, CAR, ESR, RANZCR & RSNA

Doctor, Bot, or Both: Questioning the Medicolegal Liability of Artificial Intelligence in Indian Healthcare

Governance of automated image analysis and artificial intelligence analytics in healthcare

Legal implications of artificial intelligence in health care

Radiology as a Specialty in the Era of Artificial Intelligence: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis on Medical Students, Radiology Trainees, and Radiologists

AI in Radiology: Opportunities and Challenges

AI and professional liability assessment in healthcare. A revolution in legal medicine?

The legal regulation of artificial intelligence in the European Union: A practical guide for radiologists

Defining medical liability when artificial intelligence is applied on diagnostic algorithms: a systematic review

Integrating artificial intelligence into the clinical practice of radiology: challenges and recommendations