nach oben

2024 | Buch

Kapitel lesen Erstes Kapitel lesen

Autonomous Vehicles and Civil Liability in a Global Perspective

Liability Law Study across the World in relation to SAE J3016 Standard for Driving Automation

herausgegeben von: Hans Steege, Ilaria Amelia Caggiano, Maria Cristina Gaeta, Benjamin von Bodungen

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Buchreihe : Data Science, Machine Intelligence, and Law

Enthalten in: Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" , Springer Professional "Technik" , Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Über dieses Buch

In the automotive sector, digitalisation, connectivity and automation are rapidly expanding. In tomorrow’s vehicles, human beings will merely be passengers – which raises a host of complex legal issues regarding accidents involving self-driving vehicles. This book is the first to offer a comprehensive, global overview of civil liability regimes for all levels of vehicle automation in jurisdictions that represent some of the most important markets for the automotive industry. After a technical introduction to how self-driving cars work, the individual chapters analyse the liability for driving automation at SAE J3016 levels 0 through 5 from a country-specific perspective. All chapters were written by experts in the field and follow a uniform legal structure. Hence, the book offers an essential comparative analysis of similarities and differences in the jurisdictions examined, while also providing suggestions for future legislative changes at the national and international level. The book is not only relevant for legal scholars and practitioners but will also be of particular interest to anyone involved in the design, manufacture, distribution and operation of self-driving vehicles.

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Frontmatter

Introduction

Abstract

Since the 1990s, when the first adaptive control system was introduced, there has been an increase in automation of road vehicles that progressively utilize more advanced driver assistance technologies and require less and less human intervention. This process will be completed by putting into circulation fully autonomous vehicles, which operate with no human input whatsoever, but rather by means of human-independent driving functions which have been trained by machine learning methods that are often regarded as Artificial Intelligence (AI). Despite all their positive effects (for example in terms of increasing road safety and establishing new forms of urban mobility), the era-changing technological innovations that are on the horizon entail new risks of damage and subsequent liability in road traffic that traditional liability regimes at both the international and national level are already grappling with. The comparative analysis of how jurisdictions across the globe deal with these risks lies at the core of this book. Its introductory chapter first sets out the state of the art of legal regulation concerning automated and autonomous vehicles at the international and European level. It then highlights the answers to a questionnaire provided by the authors of the individual chapters of this book that map the state of legislation related to vehicle automation in selected jurisdictions around the earth. The chapter then goes on to set out in brief the findings in terms of liability for automated and autonomous driving in the each of the jurisdictions analysed in the context of this book. Finally, several observations are presented in relation to the evolving legal framework at the level of the European Union for the manufacturing and operation of AI-driven products, of which the autonomous vehicle is likely to constitute a prominent use case in the not too distant future.

Hans Steege, Ilaria Amelia Caggiano, Maria Cristina Gaeta, Benjamin von Bodungen

Autonomous Vehicles: A Technical Introduction

Abstract

Automated and fully autonomous vehicles have the potential to revolutionize mobility in various areas, mostly notably are the opportunities to improve traffic safety and mobility access. This chapter provides a technical overview of the basic working principles of such vehicles: from processing of sensor data to planning safe and comfortable motions for the vehicle to execute. The chapter concludes by summarizing major challenges that need to be solved on the way to releasing commercial vehicles that are always reliable and safe.

Christian Pek, Sanne van Waveren

Africa

Frontmatter

South Africa: Motor Vehicle Collisions Liability Regime Applied to Automated Vehicles

Abstract

South Africa is home to some of the world’s most dangerous roads, with 12,921 people killed by motor vehicle accidents in 2018, the majority of which were caused by human error (Road Traffic Management Corporation (2019) State of Road Safety Report: Calendar available at https://www.arrivealive.co.za/documents/State%20of%20Road%20Safety%20Report%202019.pdf Accessed 19 October 2020.). According to the eNatis system there were 12,283,777 licensed drivers on the roads (This was as at 28 February 2017. See http://www.enatis.com/index.php/statistics Accessed 19 October 2020.) and 12,932,873 registered vehicles (This was as at 31 August 2020. See http://www.enatis.com/index.php/statistics Accessed 19 October 2020.). These statistics demonstrate that there is an increased need to regulate and improve the safety of South African roads. The introduction of driver assistance technologies over the last decade has been accompanied by the suggestion that these technologies will improve road safety and reduce the occurrence of accidents. Legal regimes and principles often play catch-up to ever-changing and advancing technology—this is no different in South Africa. In this chapter we consider how automated vehicles (“AVs”), at all levels of automation as per the SAE J3016 standard will be regulated in South Africa and discuss the existing laws and regulations that govern liability arising from motor vehicle collisions in South Africa.

An application of the relevant law reveals that the South African legal regime is currently flexible enough to continue to apply to motor vehicle collisions involving SAE Level 0 to 3 AVs. However, when one begins to consider how the relevant law may be applied to SAE Level 4 to 5 AVs it becomes clear that the delictual principles are no longer capable of being satisfied. South Africa’s legislative enactments which seek to compensate individuals for harms suffered on the roads or as a result of defective products still rely on the common law delictual principles, leaving a lacuna in the law when it comes to SAE Level 4 to 5 AVs. To address this lacuna, an argument to extend the actio de pauperie, however public policy considerations may impede the success of such arguments.

Jessica Anne Steele, Rakhee Dullabh

America

Frontmatter

Civil Liability for Motor Vehicle Crashes in the United States: From Conventional Vehicles to Autonomous Vehicles

Abstract

As of June 1, 2020, thirty-five states and the District of Columbia have enacted statutes expressly addressing autonomous vehicles. These regulations largely address the preconditions for operating autonomous vehicles, including rules that govern operators and technical features of the automated driving systems. Only a few states have established independent frameworks for determining liability in the event of a crash. Federal legislation governing autonomous vehicles has yet to be enacted, but developments thus far strongly suggest that federal regulations will ultimately determine the important safety performance standards required of autonomous vehicles. Federal law is supreme over state law, and so federal regulations will preempt any conflicting state law requirements and immunize a compliant autonomous vehicle from tort liability. However, if a vehicle does not comply with an applicable federal safety standard and crashes as a result, the responsible party will be subject to state tort liability for the injuries. But until federal legislation or regulation has been enacted, state law will wholly govern the space. In the absence of state legislation, state tort law will determine liability for the crash of an autonomous vehicle. In the vast majority of states, manufacturers will be subject to strict products liability for any defects that cause their vehicles to crash.

Mark A. Geistfeld

Self-Driving Cars Regulation in Colombia

Abstract

Civil liability derived from driving activities has been built, in Colombian case law, based on the doctrine of dangerous activities. In light of this doctrine, the person liable for the damage caused by a vehicle is its keeper. The driver is presumed to be the car’s keeper, who has the power of direction and control over the vehicle. Additionally, others who hold the role of keepers of the vehicle, such as its owner or the transport company to which it is affiliated, will also be liable. There is no specific legal regulation for self-driving in Colombia. However, the activity of such vehicles will indeed also be considered a dangerous one, in line with case law, since it is performed with the “use of things or energies that may cause harm to third parties.” Furthermore, the one who has programmed the vehicle system, its manufacturer, may share the quality of keeper. For this reason, this liability regime for dangerous activities, in the case of self-driving cars, will be complemented with the defective product liability regime regulated in the Colombian consumer statute and the Electronic Commerce Act guidelines.

Juan F. Córdoba-Marentes, Obdulio Velásquez-Posada

Asia

Frontmatter

Autonomous Driving in China

Abstract

This chapter focuses on autonomous driving in China. Firstly, the recent development of China’s autonomous vehicles (AVs) industry and policies released by the related governmental administrations to promote its growth are outlined. Then, the taxonomy of driving automation for vehicles of China (TDAV) is introduced as the basis for further discussion. The central and local government rules about AVs road testing and demonstration application are analyzed thereafter. The commercialization of AVs is still in its infancy in China, and a comprehensive legal framework has not yet been formulated, so these rules are the most relevant ones to AVs at the present stage. Lastly, the attribution of liability caused by AVs with different levels is discussed in accordance with the existing laws and regulations in China.

Mingyan Nie, Yuan Shen

Autonomous Driving and Civil Liability in Japan

Abstract

In Japan, no legislation specifically regulating the issue of civil liability for autonomous driving exists. Therefore, this issue is dealt within the framework of the currently existing legislation applying to conventional driving. The basic pieces of legislation applying are the Civil Code (mainly its provisions on torts, and secondarily its provisions on contractual liability), the Act on Securing Compensation for Automobile Accidents and the Product Liability Act. In most cases, damage will be covered within the framework of the Act on Securing Compensation for Automobile Accidents by an insurance. Therefore, the Product Liability Act will be of limited use, and tort liability (as well as contractual liability) will be of secondary importance in practice. Since the currently existing legal framework is not structured to specifically deal with issues resulting from autonomous driving, various problems and discussions arise, and future legislative developments are anticipated.

Antonios Karaiskos

En-Route to a Driverless City-State: Examining the Current Legal Landscape for Autonomous Vehicles in Singapore

Abstract

As part of Singapore’s Smart Nation movement, research and development trials for autonomous vehicles are already well underway in Singapore. However, Singapore’s laws relating to autonomous vehicles remain in their nascent stages as the Singapore government is presently still studying the legal consequences of autonomous vehicles and their related technologies. In 2017, the government had set up a ‘regulatory sandbox’ to regulate the trial and use of autonomous vehicles for a period of 5 years, and, in 2019, an industrial standard known as Technical Reference 68 was introduced by the Singapore Standards Council to set out best practices for the deployment of autonomous vehicles on Singapore roads.

This chapter will examine the various liability addressees involved in Level 0 to 5 autonomous vehicles (as defined under SAE J3016) based on existing legal principles in Singapore. It will also discuss recent legal trends—including the aforementioned ‘regulatory sandbox’ and Technical Reference 68—and their impact on the future regulation of autonomous vehicles in Singapore.

Thomas Hufnagel, Jaryl Lim Zhi Wei

Civil Liability Regime on Autonomous-Driving Vehicle Accident in Korea

Abstract

With the recent legal discussions on autonomous-driving vehicles that are becoming more active, the amendment to the Motor Vehicle Accident Compensation Guarantee Act Compensation Act was promulgated on April 7, 2020 and took effect on October 8, 2020, governing the legal liability arising from traffic accident involving the SAE Level 3 AVs.

Based thereon, we will discuss on which concerned party is liable in case of a relevant vehicle accident, the underlying laws and regulations, relevant requirements, and the difference between the liabilities at each stage according to the SAE Level 0-5, mainly focusing on the differences from conventional legal liabilities in the case of SAE Level 3-5 AVs.

Thereby, we will briefly explain the concept of AVs under Korean law and the scenarios that assume legal liability, dividing them into (1) SAE Level 0-2 to deal with casualty/property damages by offenders and victims, (2) SAE Level 3 to understand where the liability for casualty damages of victims lies under the amended Compensation Act, and (3) SAE Level 4-5 to examine whether the liability under the amended Compensation Act will be applied as it is by referring to the current academic discussions.

Jeung-Jun Park, Jun-Kyu Ahn

Australia

Frontmatter

Steering the Transition to Automated Vehicles in Australia: Current Status and Regulatory Changes Ahead

Abstract

Automated vehicles (AV) (The term “automated vehicle”, abbreviated to “AV” is used throughout this chapter to refer to vehicles that are equipped with an automated driving system, abbreviated to “ADS”. Australian government agencies and regulators use the term “automated vehicle” rather than “autonomous vehicle”.) will drastically alter the experiences in transport and road safety in Australia. Not only will driverless technology remove human errors such as driver fatigue, speeding and driver distraction on Australian roads, it can also improve efficient road use and minimise congestion. Looking towards the existing success of driverless technology in the Australian mining industry (Darren Gray, Sydney Morning Herald (27 April 2019), No one behind the wheel: The new workforce driving Australia’s mines.) and the introduction of driverless trains as part of the Sydney Metro project in 2019 (NSW Government (19 February 2019), What does embracing technology mean for transport? https://www.sydneymetro.info/article/what-does-embracing-technology-mean-transport. Accessed 13 January 2023.), it is clear that the adoption of AV will bring significant advantages. However, Australian regulatory frameworks are not yet equipped to address all levels of AV. Existing laws regarding road safety are based on the concept of a human driver being in control of the vehicle. This fails to recognise the reality that in vehicles operating at high levels of automation a human driver will no longer control the vehicle.

Currently only Level 0 to 2 AV (as defined under SAE J3016) (SAE International (April 2021), Surface Vehicle Recommended Practice J3016. An overview of the SAE Levels and their features is set out in the Table 1.1) are allowed to be driven on public roads in Australia. Even though Level 3 to 5 AV (as defined under SAE J3016) (SAE International (April 2021), Surface Vehicle Recommended Practice J3016.) are increasingly trialled in Australia, a comprehensive legislative reform is required before these AV can be commercially deployed at scale.

This chapter gives an overview of the current regulatory framework and proposed legislative reforms in Australia with respect to conduct of trials, safety at first supply and in-service safety of Levels 0 to 5 AV.

Angelika Yates, Samuel Siskovic

Europe

Frontmatter

Autonomous Vehicles and Civil Liability in Belgium

Abstract

In the absence of an ad hoc liability regime for autonomous vehicles, victims will have to rely on existing Belgian legal frameworks. Whereas certain road victims, the so-called ‘vulnerable users’, will presumably continue to benefit from facilitated compensation stemming from the no-fault regime of Article 29bis, other road victims, including drivers, will have to resort to general fault liability, liability for things or product liability as a legal basis for bringing a claim. The following analysis identifies potential legal hurdles that may arise when applying these regimes and which may vary according to the vehicle’s automation level. Furthermore, the analysis provides an overview into the potential for autonomous vehicles to ‘disrupt’ existing liability paradigms, notably through the foreseen digitalisation and ‘servitisation’ of mobility.

Orian Dheu, Jan De Bruyne, Peggy Valcke, Ilse Samoy

Liability for Automated and Autonomous Driving in Germany

Abstract

In 2017, regulations specifically addressing conditional vehicle automation were added to the Federal Road Traffic Act in Germany. In a further quantum leap, legal provisions for highly automated cars were introduced in 2021. The intention of the German Government of the time was to demonstrate the country’s leadership in the development of self-driving vehicles and the surrounding legal ecosystem. This chapter examines the legal ramifications of vehicle automation in Germany specifically from a liability law perspective. The focus is first on SAE Level 0–2 vehicles, thereby carefully distinguishing between the driver, vehicle keeper and manufacturer as potential liability addressees and the preconditions for such liability to be available. In view of the rapid progress of vehicle automation, the chapter then places particular focus on the novel liability issues that the operation of motor vehicles at SAE Levels 3 and 4 gives rise to. As these automation levels have already been taken up by the 2017 and 2021 amendments to the Road Traffic Act respectively, it lends itself to elaborate on the merits and pitfalls of these novel statutory provisions, which may be of particular interest to readers from jurisdictions that are currently considering the introduction of a legislative framework for SAE Levels 3 and 4. What is more, the intricate allocation of liability in the context of emerging trends in the automotive sector such as artificial intelligence and software updates is discussed. Finally, liability for SAE Level 5 driving is dealt with. So far, no specific legal rules for the operation of fully automated vehicles exist in Germany. Hence, the adaptability of the existing civil liability system towards robotic vehicles will be analysed in the last part of this chapter.

Benjamin von Bodungen, Hans Steege

The Law Applicable to Autonomous Cars Driving in France

Abstract

The law applicable to autonomous cars driving in France is recent. It was initially developed for the sole purpose of allowing “experiments” relating to these new vehicles. More recently, various laws and regulations have been passed to regulate them on a long-term basis. This paper presents the rules that apply in France, studying those that apply to the use of these vehicles and the liabilities.

Lionel Andreu

Civil Liability for Damage Caused by Autonomous Vehicles Under Spanish Law

Abstract

This study analyses the legal regime of civil liability for damages derived from accidents involving motor vehicles, whether autonomous or not. The irruption of such vehicles into legal traffic is a novelty that Spanish legislation must address. The legitimation for compensation will correspond to the owner of the damaged assets, the injured party and, if applicable, to the relatives, to the legally predetermined relatives with presumptive character in the event of death. Compensation for damages shall follow the general system of valuation for pecuniary damage or the legal system of valuation for personal injury, without the injured party having to suffer a loss in this respect depending on whether or not the vehicle is an autonomous one. The liability, in the absence of a driver, by virtue of the pro damanato principle, prevailing in Spanish law, must fall on the owner of the vehicle, and his liability must be interpreted as strict liability, and on the insurance company or the Insurance Compensation Consortium, as the case may be. If the loss was due to the defective nature of the vehicle, in any of its facets, the owner could claim against the manufacturer.

Ángela Fernández Arévalo, Juan Pablo Murga Fernández

Italian Civil Liability Applicable to Self-Driving Cars

Abstract

The development of vehicle automation systems has reached high levels and is projected, due to technological evolution, towards even faster progress. The introduction of autonomous vehicles on the market entails considerable advantages but it also poses a challenge to current regulation on civil liability.

The present contribution, focusing on Italian law, investigates problems concerning civil liability caused by traffic accidents between two vehicles, where at least one is self-driving. The chapter will offer a critical analysis of the current regulation on automobile accidents, with the view of evaluating whether Italian civil liability law offers adequate protection to the victim in case a self-driving car is involved. More precisely the chapter will verify whether the current Italian law provides a comprehensive regulation on autonomous vehicle accidents or, rather, if it is necessary to modify the existing regulation in order to identify more clearly the figure of the tortfeasor in such cases.

Maria Cristina Gaeta

Civil Liability for Self-Driving Cars in Dutch Law

Abstract

This chapter discusses the Dutch rules on civil liability for accidents involving traditional cars and self-driving cars. In Dutch law, various parties may be liable in the case of accidents with a self-driving car: the owner or keeper, the driver, the possessor, the manufacturer, the car mechanic. In practice, the owner or keeper will primarily be held liable as art. 185 WVW imposes strict liability for all accidents, even for self-driving cars. As insurance companies will cover the damages for such accidents, they may take recourse on car manufacturers on the basis of product liability or negligence. The driver (who is usually also covered by the car insurance) may also be liable on the basis of negligence if he could and should have intervened to prevent an accident. In the case of level 4 or 5 cars, the main issue is whether the courts will allow a driver to not pay attention continuously.

Eric Tjong Tjin Tai

The Civil Liability for Self-Driving Cars in Austria

Abstract

Austrian law provides a sufficient legal basis for assessing liability issues in connection with self-driving cars. A driver’s liability according to the rules of the Austrian Civil Code (ABGB) may be difficult to argue and especially to prove as an unlawful and culpable behaviour by a legal subject may not be established. However, the holder of a motor vehicle could generally be held liable according to the rules of the Austrian Railway and Motor Vehicle Liability Act (EKHG), which provides for a strict (yet limited) liability. In addition, the manufacturer of the autonomous vehicle as well as the software producer are liable for any damages caused by a malfunction of a vehicle’s control software according to the rules of the Austrian Product Liability Act (PHG).

Jörg Zehetner, Merve Cetin, Angelika Holzer

Liability in the Case of Autonomous Cars in Romania

Abstract

The liability is based in the Romanian contemporary civil law on the idea of culpa; still, there are cases when the liability has an objective nature, without culpa, founded on the idea of guarantee, based on the activity risk, the authority risk or a combination of the previous two types of risk, in order to establish the support of the objective guarantee obligation.

A type of objective tort liability is the liability for goods, where the central subject is the legal guardian.

The liability for the traffic accidents caused by vehicles equipped with driver assistance systems is involved only under the conditions of the liability for one’s own actions; for the autonomous vehicles, the legal guardian of the accident causing vehicle during the automatic use, is held liable.

Vasile Luha, Bogdan Florea, Silvia Maican

Autonomous Vehicle and Liability in Sweden

Abstract

This chapter is the Swedish part of a research project that intends to edit a comparative description and analysis of civil liability in the context of automated vehicles for selected countries.

The chapter shows that Swedish liability legislation regarding vehicles focuses mainly on three liability subjects: the manufacturer, the owner, and the driver.

When the vehicle is used in traffic, the driver is the main liability subject. This poses legal difficulties in the context of automated vehicles. Swedish law does not provide a legal definition of a “driver”; however, it is clear from case law that a driver is a physical person and not software or a computer.

Our conclusions are that the Swedish liability legislation is adapted for driving on levels 0–3 according to the SAE J3016 standard. The current legislation regarding traffic insurance is such that it could be applied for all levels of automated vehicles. Traffic insurance will remain an important part of liability law for automated vehicles on levels 4 and 5.

For vehicles on automation levels 4 and 5, the existing legislation within Swedish liability law requires adaptations, especially with regards to the driver’s responsibilities during automated travel. Currently, Swedish law depends on the courts to develop the concept of “driver” and the driver’s responsibilities to function in a context with automated vehicles. We therefore invite the Swedish legislature to promptly continue to develop the Swedish liability legislation in light of the technical advances within the field of automated vehicles.

Anton Olsson, Karl Montelius

The United Kingdom

Frontmatter

Automated Vehicle Liability in Great Britain

Abstract

The UK Government has sought to position the UK as a world-leading development hub for automated vehicles. It recognised that an effective regulatory model for automated vehicles was necessary to achieve this. After an extensive review of UK road traffic law by the Department for Transport, the Law Commission of England and Wales, and the Scottish Law Commission, were tasked with ‘reviewing the UK’s regulatory framework to enable the safe and effective deployment of automated vehicles on Great Britain’s roads.’ Meanwhile, the world’s first insurer liability scheme for automated vehicles was enacted in the Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018.

This chapter provides a detailed overview of the existing law and insurance requirements for vehicles at SAE Levels 0–2 in Great Britain. Thereafter, it carries out an extensive analysis of the new insurer liability regime for ‘automated vehicles’ (SAE Levels 3–5) under the Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018. It also sets out a detailed review of the various recommendations of the Law Commissions in their three Consultation Papers and their Joint Report in 2022. Finally, it examines how automated vehicle insurers might then recover their losses under the Consumer Protection Act 1987, along with the law of tort/delict and contract.

Felix Boon

Backmatter

Titel: Autonomous Vehicles and Civil Liability in a Global Perspective
herausgegeben von: Hans Steege
Ilaria Amelia Caggiano
Maria Cristina Gaeta
Benjamin von Bodungen
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Electronic ISBN: 978-3-031-41992-8
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-41991-1
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41992-8