header-logo header-logo

27 May 2016 / Stephanie Pywell
Issue: 7700 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

The reasonable robot

nlj_7700_pywell

Stephanie Pywell ponders some of the liability dilemmas facing UK law-makers at the dawn of the age of driverless cars

The issue of driverless cars—more properly, autonomous vehicles (AVs)—is all around us. On 2 October 2015, Lucy McCormick’s article in NLJ outlined some of the provisions of the UK government’s code for testing AVs in public places (see “Drive me (in the) wild”, 165 NLJ 7670, p 7). On 14 February 2016, a Google-controlled Lexus AV carrying a test-driver was involved in a collision with a bus in Santa Clara, California. On 16 March, the full text of the Budget (though not the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s speech) stated that, “by 2017” (a maximum of 19 months’ time) trials of driverless cars and “truck platooning”—which means convoys of up to 10 autonomous 44-tonne lorries, with a driver in only the leading vehicle—will take place on the UK’s “strategic road network”.

Last Wednesday, the Queen’s Speech confirmed the government’s intention for the UK to be “at the forefront of technology for new forms of transport,

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll