Research On The Responsibility For Traffic Accidents Involving Driverless Cars

Firstly,this paper explains the flourishing development status and huge social benefits of driverless cars.Secondly,it defines the traffic accidents of driverless cars.Thirdly,it analyzes the main legal obstacles to the responsibility for traffic accidents involving driverless cars,including the deficient responsibility distribution mechanism and the traffic accident insurance system demanding innovation.Fourthly,it elaborates the legislation of driverless cars in Britain,Germany and the United States,and analyzes the legislative experience worthy of reference.Finally,the legislative proposals are proposed based on the inspiration of domestic and foreign practice and related theories.In terms of the responsibility distribution mechanism for traffic accidents involving driverless cars,it firstly suggests that the compensation for the infringed exceeding the liability limit of insurance companies should be borne by manufacturers of driverless cars and the manufacturers have rights to recover from actual responsible parties.Secondly,it expounds on the methods of analyzing the product liability of actual responsible parties such as sellers,manufacturers of software,hardware and intelligent systems:In terms of design defects,it is recommended to adopt American consumer expectations test or risk-utility test as auxiliary methods to analyze design defects of driverless cars-related products without national standards and mature industrial standards,and automatic driving performance under the level claimed for competition should be identified as a design defect.In terms of manufacturing defects,it is proposed to draw lessons from American Restatement(Third)Of Tort where the damaged party assumes the obligation of providing a circumstantial inference other than direct proof of manufacturing defects of driverless cars' high-tech products.The practice not only reduces the damaged party's unreasonable burden of proof,but also forces the actual responsible party with explanatory ability to explain the technical problems of his product in detail to avoid taking responsibility,which is conducive to identify the facts and attribution of liability.In terms of warning or instruction defects,the warning and instruction obligations should continue until the driverless car sold is scrapped,and disclosing premiums of each type of driverless cars that can directly reflect safety performance should become a necessary condition for fully fulfilling warning obligations.Thirdly,it discusses that the owner or user who fails to maintain his driverless car in time,requires the car to arrive at a destination that affects safe driving or travel in bad weather regardless of the warning of the car,interferes with normal driving or uses a reassembled or scrap driverless car should bear compensation liability for a traffic accident caused by the car.In addition,in the event of damages caused by a traffic accident involving a driverless car which is thieved,robbed or plundered,the thief,robber or plunderer should bear compensation liability on the basis of operational interest.Fourthly,it mentions that the hackers who attack intelligent systems or software of driverless cars should bear compensation liability for traffic accidents caused by the attack.Fifthly,it proposes the restrictive interpretation of the exemption from product liability.Finally it explains that it isn't feasible to shift responsibility for traffic accidents to driverless cars equipped with deep learning function.As far as insurance system of traffic accidents involving driverless cars is concerned,the suggestions are listed as follows:Firstly,the applicant stipulated in'Regulations on Compulsory Traffic Accident Liability Insurance for Motor Vehicles'should be changed into owners or managers of traditional motor vehicles and manufactures of driverless cars.Secondly,premium rate assessment policies specialized for driverless cars should be formulated by reconsidering the factors affecting premium rates.Thirdly,insurance services should be innovated to correspond with the unique risks of driverless cars,new insurance plans should be developed for various risks and risk levels of driverless cars of each brand,and insurance packages should be customized for each model of driverless cars of each brand for volume purchase of manufactures.Fourthly,premium discounts should be given to the driverless cars with specific equipment for increased safety.Fifthly,the government should provide insurance for insurance companies to encourage those companies to underwrite emerging technologies.Finally,a national driverless car insurance fund should be established,so that compensation disputes of traffic accidents involving driverless cars can be handled by governments,including those at township level,which can make up for the inconvenience to the infringed caused by manufacturers who should bear strict liability but hardly set up offices at the township level to deal with compensation disputes.The practice can also cope with the situation where an oligopolistic market may form after insurance companies experience the impact of technological changes or the whole insurance industry cannot cope well with the development of driverless technology.