Questions of fault liability: A case study analysis of in-orbit collisions with debris

IF 1 Q3 ENGINEERING, AEROSPACE Journal of Space Safety Engineering Pub Date : 2023-09-14 DOI:10.1016/j.jsse.2023.08.001
Andrea Capurso , Paolo Marzioli , Michela Boscia
{"title":"Questions of fault liability: A case study analysis of in-orbit collisions with debris","authors":"Andrea Capurso ,&nbsp;Paolo Marzioli ,&nbsp;Michela Boscia","doi":"10.1016/j.jsse.2023.08.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In 1972, the international community established a regime of liability for damages occurring in outer space based on ‘fault’. Fifty years later, the congested and polluted reality of the space environment has limited dramatically its effectiveness. Only in very few instances, filing a claim under such regime can reasonably ensure compensation to an injured satellite operator. The present paper describes different study cases where resorting to a fault-based liability claim appears problematic. Based on real conjunction assessment alerts, the authors look into various hypothetical scenarios from the perspective of a fictitious satellite operator, whose spacecraft was damaged by an accidental collision in orbit. The aim is to analyse the effective observability over orbital collisions involving small satellites and space debris (attributable or not) and to evaluate the real chances of obtaining compensation, from the operational and legal points of view. At the centre of this study, therefore, is the evaluation, in fact and in law, of the solidity of a potential claim against the perpetrator of the harm. To that end, the discourse takes into consideration the legal difficulties that are generally connected to fault-based liabilities in international law.</p><p>The definitional vagueness of the term ‘fault’, the necessity to identify a fault-standard, the proof of failure in the performance of a duty of care, are all elements to consider for filing a claim under the liability regime of 1972.</p><p>However, next to them, the space environment poses additional hurdles with regard to facts and evidence. Satellite operators do not always have the technological instruments to retrieve all the information related to orbital events, such as collisions. Moreover, a complete observability over in-orbit events can be hard to reach for several classes of spacecraft (e.g. small, nano- or pico-satellites). This is especially troublesome for establishing one of the essential elements of ‘fault’: the so-called “chain of causation”. The authors will present their views on how the uncertainties posed by the liability regime of 1972 can be dealt with from a legal and from a technical perspective. In addition, several possible legal solutions and recommendations for the upcoming years of in-orbit operations and space traffic management will be proposed at the end.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37283,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Space Safety Engineering","volume":"10 4","pages":"Pages 439-446"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Space Safety Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468896723000666","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, AEROSPACE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 1972, the international community established a regime of liability for damages occurring in outer space based on ‘fault’. Fifty years later, the congested and polluted reality of the space environment has limited dramatically its effectiveness. Only in very few instances, filing a claim under such regime can reasonably ensure compensation to an injured satellite operator. The present paper describes different study cases where resorting to a fault-based liability claim appears problematic. Based on real conjunction assessment alerts, the authors look into various hypothetical scenarios from the perspective of a fictitious satellite operator, whose spacecraft was damaged by an accidental collision in orbit. The aim is to analyse the effective observability over orbital collisions involving small satellites and space debris (attributable or not) and to evaluate the real chances of obtaining compensation, from the operational and legal points of view. At the centre of this study, therefore, is the evaluation, in fact and in law, of the solidity of a potential claim against the perpetrator of the harm. To that end, the discourse takes into consideration the legal difficulties that are generally connected to fault-based liabilities in international law.

The definitional vagueness of the term ‘fault’, the necessity to identify a fault-standard, the proof of failure in the performance of a duty of care, are all elements to consider for filing a claim under the liability regime of 1972.

However, next to them, the space environment poses additional hurdles with regard to facts and evidence. Satellite operators do not always have the technological instruments to retrieve all the information related to orbital events, such as collisions. Moreover, a complete observability over in-orbit events can be hard to reach for several classes of spacecraft (e.g. small, nano- or pico-satellites). This is especially troublesome for establishing one of the essential elements of ‘fault’: the so-called “chain of causation”. The authors will present their views on how the uncertainties posed by the liability regime of 1972 can be dealt with from a legal and from a technical perspective. In addition, several possible legal solutions and recommendations for the upcoming years of in-orbit operations and space traffic management will be proposed at the end.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
过失责任问题:轨道上与碎片碰撞的案例研究分析
1972年,国际社会建立了以“过失”为基础的外层空间损害赔偿责任制度。五十年后,空间环境拥挤和污染的现实极大地限制了其有效性。只有在极少数情况下,根据这种制度提出索赔才能合理地确保向受伤的卫星运营商提供赔偿。本文描述了诉诸过错责任索赔出现问题的不同研究案例。基于真实的对接评估警报,作者从一个虚拟的卫星运营商的角度研究了各种假设情景,该运营商的航天器在轨道上因意外碰撞而损坏。其目的是分析涉及小卫星和空间碎片(可归属或不可归属)的轨道碰撞的有效可观测性,并从业务和法律角度评估获得补偿的实际机会。因此,本研究的核心是在事实上和法律上评估对伤害的肇事者提出的潜在索赔的可靠性。为此目的,本文考虑到国际法中一般与基于过错的责任有关的法律困难。“过失”一词的定义模糊、确定过失标准的必要性、未能履行注意义务的证据,都是根据1972年的责任制度提出索赔时需要考虑的因素。然而,除了这些障碍之外,空间环境在事实和证据方面构成了额外的障碍。卫星运营商并不总是拥有技术手段来检索与轨道事件有关的所有信息,例如碰撞。此外,对于几类航天器(如小型、纳米或微型卫星),很难达到对在轨事件的完全可观测性。这对于确立“过错”的基本要素之一:所谓的“因果链”尤其麻烦。作者将就如何从法律和技术角度处理1972年赔偿责任制度所造成的不确定性提出他们的看法。此外,最后还将为未来几年的在轨操作和空间交通管理提出若干可能的法律解决办法和建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Space Safety Engineering
Journal of Space Safety Engineering Engineering-Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
80
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board An economic indicator of the orbital debris environment Adaptive relative orbit control considering laser ablation uncertainty Post mission disposal of Megha-Tropiques-1 through controlled atmospheric Re-entry to be published in: The journal of space safety engineering Development of ballistic limit equations in support of the Mars sample return mission
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1