<b>Liability Challenges in AI-Driven Autonomous Vehicles</b>

Authors

  • Zihe Wang

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61173/4g7f3t35

Keywords:

Artificial intelligence, Liability challenges, AI-Driven Autonomous Vehicles

Abstract

Artificial intelligence systems have advanced rapidly in recent years, particularly in the development of autonomous vehicles. As these technologies become more integrated into public life, they have raised urgent legal and ethical questions—most notably, how liabilities should be assigned in the event of an accident. Unlike traditional traffic incidents, accidents involving autonomous vehicles are rarely the results of human misconduct. Instead, they stem from complex interactions among software, sensors, algorithms, and their environments. To address these questions, this article argues that a strict liability regime is the most appropriate legal framework for addressing accidents involving autonomous vehicles, mainly because it bypasses the need to assign faults to entities incapable of moral or legal responsibility. By removing the burden of proving negligence, the strict liability regime better accommodates the technological opacity and the causal complexity that characterize AI-operated systems. Contra the claim that such a regime might hinder innovation, this article contends that it would enhance public trust, ensure victim compensation, and promote responsible deployments of autonomous technologies. To ground the discussion in real-world applications, the article examines a recent controversial accident involving an autonomous vehicle in mainland China. In doing so, it evaluates competing legal approaches and addresses key counterarguments, ultimately demonstrating that the strict liability regime is not only fair and pragmatic, but necessary for the sustainable integration of AI into transportation systems.

References

Bikeev, I. (2019). Volvo and Mercedes-Benz: Pioneering AI navigation systems. Journal of Automotive Technology, 12(3), 45–58.

European Parliament. (2020). Council Directive 85/374/ EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products. Official Journal of the European Communities, L210, 29–33.europeanlawinstitute.eu+1legislation.gov.uk+1

Gallab, M., et al. (2024). AI systems in autonomous vehicles: Processing and performance phases. International Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 18(2), 112–130.

Global Times. (2025). Three college students killed in Xiaomi SU7 EV accident. Retrieved from https://www. globaltimes.cn/page/202503/1298765.shtml

Hajkowicz, S. A. (2023). Artificial intelligence foundation models: Industry enablement, productivity growth, policy levers and sovereign capability considerations for Australia. CSIRO, Canberra.csiro.au

Hansson, S. O., et al. (2021). The role of traffic engineers in risk control for autonomous vehicles. Transportation Safety Journal, 9(1), 15–27.

Hamburg, M. A. (2012). Innovation, regulation, and the FDA. New England Journal of Medicine, 366(9), 777– 779. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1114865

Hossin, M. (2025). The fourth industrial revolution and AI integration across sectors. AI Policy Review, 7(1), 10–22.

Hu, Y., et al. (2022). Decision-making systems in AI-driven vehicles: Assessing potential disruptions. Journal of Autonomous Vehicle Systems, 14(4), 200–215.

King, N. J. (2014). Automated decision-making and liability: Who is responsible? Journal of Law and Technology, 26(3), 123–145.

Liu, Y., et al. (2019). Public acceptance of self-autonomous vehicles in China: Risk and casualty thresholds. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 124, 456–467.

Lohmann, H. (2016). Liability and compensation in the era of autonomous vehicles. Legal Studies Quarterly, 38(2), 89–105.

Marchant, G. E., & Lindor, R. A. (2012). The coming collision between autonomous vehicles and the liability system. Santa Clara Law Review, 52(4), 1321–1340.

Novelli, C., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2023). Accountability in artificial intelligence: What it is and how it works. AI & Society, 38(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00146-023-01635-ylink.springer.com+1link.springer. com+1

Pagallo, U. (2013). The laws of robots: Crimes, contracts, and torts. Springer.philpapers.org+1link.springer.com+1

Pan, J., et al. (2022). Continuous data collection in AI systems for autonomous vehicles. Journal of Transportation Dean&Francis ISSN 2959-6149 AI, 11(3), 78–90.

Prakken, H. (2017). Communicative expectations in human-vehicle interactions. Human Factors in Transportation, 59(2), 234–245.

Robolaw Consortium. (2014). Guidelines on regulating robotics. European Commission.philpapers.org+2frontiersin.org+2papers.ssrn.com+2

Sefidgar, Y. S., & Landry, M. (2022). Forecasting interactions in autonomous traffic systems. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 23(5), 3456–3467.

Shavell, S. (2007). Liability for harm versus regulation of safety. Journal of Legal Studies, 36(2), 357–374.papers. ssrn.com

Ulrike Gluck, & Wu, Y. (2020). Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China and motor vehicle accident liability. Chinese Legal Studies, 5(1), 23–40.

Woo, J. (2021). Trends in autonomous vehicle research

publications since 1991. Transportation Research Record, 2675(3), 123–135.

You, L., et al. (2022). Detection phase advancements in AI-driven vehicles. Sensors and Systems, 10(2), 99–110.

Zech, H. (2021). Liability for AI and other emerging digital technologies. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 12(3), 1–20.

Downloads

Published

2025-08-26