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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll