header-logo header-logo

Automated vehicles: liability, intangibles & satellite litigation

05 December 2019 / Karishma Paroha
Issue: 7867 / Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail
12725
Karishma Paroha outlines FOIL’s response to the Law Commissions’ joint consultation on automated vehicles
  • Limitation, interpretation and application: ensuring the safe deployment of driving automation.

The Law Commission of England and Wales and the Scottish Law Commission (the Law Commissions) have now published two joint consultations on automated vehicles.

The first paper published in November 2018 focused on safety assurance, civil and criminal liability, including contributory negligence as defined within the Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018 (AEV 2018), and data retention (see ‘Automated Vehicles: A joint preliminary consultation paper’). The Law Commissions also considered manufacturer’s liability, focusing on product liability under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 (CPA 1987). The second paper, published in October 2019, focused on passenger services (see ‘Automated Vehicles: Consultation Paper 2 on Passenger Services and Public Transport’).

In April 2019, EU commissioner Violeta Bulc said that by 2030 ‘we will have the new generation of vehicles that will be fully automated’. However, the Forum of Insurance Lawyers (FOIL) has warned that there are currently too many

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll