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

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Chief information officer appointment strengthens technology leadership

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Firm strengthens Wilmslow team with two solicitor appointments

DWF—Ian Plumley

DWF—Ian Plumley

Londoninsurance and reinsurance practice announces partner appointment

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll