header-logo header-logo

15 November 2018 / Nicholas Bevan
Issue: 7817 / Categories: Features , Insurance / reinsurance
printer mail-detail

Driverless vehicles: a future perfect?

In the first part of a special series on road traffic accident reform, Nicholas Bevan reports on the challenges posed by automated vehicles

  • An overview of Part I of the Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018, which is intended to fill the gap in civil liability law highlighted by the rise of automated vehicles such as driverless cars.

Part I of the Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018 (AEVA 2018) represents the most radical reform to the regulatory framework of compulsory motor insurance for 88 years. It is intended to address a gap in our civil liability law made manifest by developments in vehicle automation. This government is keen to facilitate this technology that promises to transform our lives in the future.

In 2017, the chancellor of the exchequer stated that the government intended these reforms to get driverless cars on our roads by 2021; much depends upon what is meant by ‘driverless’.

Third-party motor insurance was made compulsory under the Road Traffic Act 1930. The objective was, and remains, to guarantee that motor accident

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll