2018年《自动驾驶和电动汽车法》第1部分及其后:批判性评论

IF 0.3 Q3 LAW Statute Law Review Pub Date : 2020-10-26 DOI:10.1093/slr/hmz021
James Marson, K. Ferris, Jill Dickinson
{"title":"2018年《自动驾驶和电动汽车法》第1部分及其后:批判性评论","authors":"James Marson, K. Ferris, Jill Dickinson","doi":"10.1093/slr/hmz021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n On 19 July 2018, the Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018 (AEVA) received Royal Assent. As motor vehicles are becoming increasingly technologically based, with driving aids having taken over many of the more mundane (and possibly dangerous) aspects of driving from the driver, it is imperative that legislation keeps pace to determine the responsibilities of the parties. Motor insurance provides protection for those involved with vehicles and who may suffer harm, injury, and loss due to the negligence of the actors. This is most frequently driver error, but may also include manufacturing defects, which result in deaths and less serious injuries. It is also here where the intersection between torts and insurance laws needs careful management. It would be particularly unfair to ask drivers or third-party victims of motor vehicle accidents to seek redress from a manufacturer for losses incurred during the actions of an autonomous vehicle. Consumer law has historically removed this burden from affected consumers and it is entirely sensible for the law to protect individuals in an emerging field—and perhaps even more so given the trajectory of vehicles with driver-enabled qualities and the numbers of vehicles currently featuring such innovations. Yet, the AEVA consists of aspects which are troubling in respect of the motor insurance industry’s dominance of this market, the application of compulsory insurance, and exclusions and limitations to responsibility which expose policy holders and victims to EU-breaching levels of risk.","PeriodicalId":43737,"journal":{"name":"Statute Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/slr/hmz021","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018 Part 1 and Beyond: A Critical Review\",\"authors\":\"James Marson, K. Ferris, Jill Dickinson\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/slr/hmz021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n On 19 July 2018, the Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018 (AEVA) received Royal Assent. As motor vehicles are becoming increasingly technologically based, with driving aids having taken over many of the more mundane (and possibly dangerous) aspects of driving from the driver, it is imperative that legislation keeps pace to determine the responsibilities of the parties. Motor insurance provides protection for those involved with vehicles and who may suffer harm, injury, and loss due to the negligence of the actors. This is most frequently driver error, but may also include manufacturing defects, which result in deaths and less serious injuries. It is also here where the intersection between torts and insurance laws needs careful management. It would be particularly unfair to ask drivers or third-party victims of motor vehicle accidents to seek redress from a manufacturer for losses incurred during the actions of an autonomous vehicle. Consumer law has historically removed this burden from affected consumers and it is entirely sensible for the law to protect individuals in an emerging field—and perhaps even more so given the trajectory of vehicles with driver-enabled qualities and the numbers of vehicles currently featuring such innovations. Yet, the AEVA consists of aspects which are troubling in respect of the motor insurance industry’s dominance of this market, the application of compulsory insurance, and exclusions and limitations to responsibility which expose policy holders and victims to EU-breaching levels of risk.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43737,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Statute Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/slr/hmz021\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Statute Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/slr/hmz021\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Statute Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/slr/hmz021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

2018年7月19日,《2018年自动驾驶和电动汽车法案》(AEVA)获得御准。随着机动车的技术水平越来越高,驾驶辅助设备已经从驾驶员手中接管了驾驶中许多更平凡(也可能是危险的)的方面,立法必须跟上步伐,确定当事人的责任。汽车保险为那些与车辆有关的人提供保护,这些人可能因行为者的疏忽而遭受伤害和损失。这是最常见的驾驶员失误,但也可能包括制造缺陷,导致死亡和不太严重的伤害。也正是在这里,侵权行为法和保险法之间的交集需要谨慎处理。要求司机或机动车事故的第三方受害者就自动驾驶汽车在运行过程中遭受的损失向制造商寻求赔偿,这将是特别不公平的。从历史上看,消费者法已经从受影响的消费者身上消除了这种负担,法律在一个新兴领域保护个人是完全合理的——考虑到具有驾驶员驱动特性的车辆的发展轨迹和目前具有此类创新功能的车辆的数量,这一点可能更加合理。然而,AEVA包含了一些令人不安的方面,包括汽车保险业在这个市场的主导地位、强制保险的应用以及责任的排除和限制,这些都使保单持有人和受害者面临违反欧盟的风险水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018 Part 1 and Beyond: A Critical Review
On 19 July 2018, the Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018 (AEVA) received Royal Assent. As motor vehicles are becoming increasingly technologically based, with driving aids having taken over many of the more mundane (and possibly dangerous) aspects of driving from the driver, it is imperative that legislation keeps pace to determine the responsibilities of the parties. Motor insurance provides protection for those involved with vehicles and who may suffer harm, injury, and loss due to the negligence of the actors. This is most frequently driver error, but may also include manufacturing defects, which result in deaths and less serious injuries. It is also here where the intersection between torts and insurance laws needs careful management. It would be particularly unfair to ask drivers or third-party victims of motor vehicle accidents to seek redress from a manufacturer for losses incurred during the actions of an autonomous vehicle. Consumer law has historically removed this burden from affected consumers and it is entirely sensible for the law to protect individuals in an emerging field—and perhaps even more so given the trajectory of vehicles with driver-enabled qualities and the numbers of vehicles currently featuring such innovations. Yet, the AEVA consists of aspects which are troubling in respect of the motor insurance industry’s dominance of this market, the application of compulsory insurance, and exclusions and limitations to responsibility which expose policy holders and victims to EU-breaching levels of risk.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: The principal objectives of the Review are to provide a vehicle for the consideration of the legislative process, the use of legislation as an instrument of public policy and of the drafting and interpretation of legislation. The Review, which was first established in 1980, is the only journal of its kind within the Commonwealth. It is of particular value to lawyers in both private practice and in public service, and to academics, both lawyers and political scientists, who write and teach within the field of legislation.
期刊最新文献
Revisiting Criminal Law Bills: An In-Depth Critical Analysis of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Bill Four Years of Anti-COVID-19 Regulations in Greece: Overview of the Legislative and Regulatory Process and of an Exemplary Administrative Codification Two Uses of Purpose in Statutory Interpretation Climate Volatility, Foundational Freedoms, and the Environment Act 2021: The Transformative Potential of the Principle of Legality Protection of Athletes’ Rights in International Sports Organizations
×
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