header-logo header-logo

18 January 2017
Issue: 7730 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Insurance for driverless cars

Compulsory motor vehicle insurance is to be extended to protect victims of crashes caused by driverless cars.

The Department of Transport published its response last week to a consultation on driverless cars, also known as automated vehicle technology (AVT) and advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS).

The consultation, Pathway to driverless cars, which closed on 9 September, looked at what regulatory barriers to the introduction of AVT and ADAS could be removed, insurance requirements for automated vehicles and the regulatory framework for driving such vehicles.

The department said minimum legislative changes will be made to enable the insurance market to develop automated vehicle insurance products. However, it will be compulsory to have insurance to protect victims where the vehicle causes a crash in automated mode.

The department’s response states: “The victim will have a direct right against the motor insurer and the insurer in turn will have a right of recovery against the responsible party to the extent there is a liability under existing laws, including under product liability laws.”

Nicholas Bevan, solicitor and motor insurance specialist, said the department had accepted his and other respondents’ “concern that whilst the automated driving function is active, the driver would, in effect, be a passenger, necessitating statutory intervention to compel insurers to meet claims without the victim having to prove a product defect was causative”. 

“It reflects our concern (in the company of various other respondents) over the causational and other difficulties faced by claimants in pursuing and establishing a product liability claim. It has accepted that insufficient protection would be provided under its initial proposal (which we criticised) of simply imposing a duty on owners and users to have product liability cover or just incorporating such cover within an existing third party motor policy without more.

“I think this is a major achievement.”

The department said it would bring forward a Modern Transport Bill this year.

Issue: 7730 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll