The key question is: who should assume civil liability when an accident occurs in a vehicle with automated driving systems? There is no single answer, and it depends on technical, legal and insurance factors. At the insurance department of Belzuz Abogados, S.L.P., we analyse the different scenarios, combining the principles of civil liability with current legislation and case law.
Autonomous vehicles and ADAS systems: concepts and classification
To determine how liability is assigned, it is important to understand the different levels of automation. The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) classifies autonomous vehicles from level 0 to level 5, according to the degree of automation:
- Levels 0 to 2: assisted driving. The driver continues to make critical decisions, while ADAS systems assist with specific tasks, such as automatic braking when obstacles are detected or lane keeping. These systems act as support, but do not exempt the driver from their responsibility to supervise and act.
- Level 3: semi-autonomous driving. The vehicle can temporarily take over critical functions, but the driver must be available to intervene when the system requires it. This level introduces legal complexities, as responsibility may be shared between the driver and the manufacturer, depending on the circumstances of the accident.
- Levels 4 and 5: fully autonomous driving. The vehicle takes virtually all driving decisions, and the driver’s role is reduced to almost nothing. In these cases, liability lies primarily with the manufacturer and, in certain cases, with the insurer.
This classification is not only technical: it directly influences how civil liability is analysed. The higher the level of autonomy, the more relevant the liability of the manufacturer and the insurer becomes, while that of the driver decreases.
Driver responsibility
At low levels of automation, the driver remains primarily responsible for driving. Article 1902 of the Spanish Civil Code establishes that “anyone who, by action or omission, causes damage to another, through fault or negligence, is obliged to repair the damage caused”. Spanish case law applies these principles even when the vehicle is equipped with assistance systems, considering that the obligation of supervision rests with the person behind the wheel.
If a driver ignores ADAS alerts or deactivates the system, and an accident occurs as a result, the responsibility lies directly with the driver. Even in vehicles with technological assistance, the driver’s behaviour remains decisive. At higher levels of automation (level 3), although the vehicle can take over driving functions, the driver has an obligation to remain alert and ready to intervene. Therefore, a proper understanding of the system’s capabilities and limitations is crucial. Case law emphasises that the degree of driver intervention must be assessed on a case-by-case basis and that the mere presence of technology does not exempt the driver from liability.
Manufacturer liability
As vehicles become more autonomous, manufacturer liability becomes more relevant. This may arise from design defects, manufacturing faults or a lack of sufficient information on the safe operation of the vehicle or the ADAS system. The applicable regulations include:
- Directive 85/374/EEC on liability for defective products, incorporated into Spanish law by Law 22/1994, which establishes the strict liability of the manufacturer for damage caused by manufacturing or design defects or by insufficient information on the safe use of the product.
- The Civil Code, Articles 1902 and 1903, which regulate liability for one’s own actions and for damage caused by persons under one’s supervision or by property belonging to one.
In practice, this means that a manufacturer may be liable if an ADAS system fails and causes an accident, if the design does not adequately anticipate interaction with the driver, or if the instructions for use and warnings are insufficient. European case law, and in particular cases involving Tesla vehicles in “Autopilot” mode, have emphasised the importance of manufacturers providing clear and sufficient information about the limitations of the system. Although there are no identical cases in Spain yet, the courts could apply the same principles of strict liability for defective products, assessing whether the manufacturer fulfilled its duty of safety.
Insurer liability
The role of the insurer is essential in the new landscape of automated mobility. Traditional policies are designed to cover accidents resulting from driver negligence, but autonomous vehicles pose more complex situations, in which accidents can occur without direct human intervention.
Insurers must guarantee coverage in cases where the accident was caused by a system failure and the driver did not act negligently. They can also exercise subrogation rights, claiming against the manufacturer when a defect in the vehicle or software is proven. In addition, policies need to be adapted to different levels of autonomy, considering the intervention of ADAS systems and the variable involvement of the driver.
From the perspective of the insurers’ defence, each case requires detailed analysis: the interaction between driver and technology, the existence of proven system failures, the manufacturer’s compliance with safety standards and the coverage contracted must be assessed. This approach allows risks to be managed in a manner consistent with the law and fairness, protecting all parties involved.
Challenges and prospects
The regulation of civil liability in autonomous vehicles and ADAS continues to evolve. Legislators and courts must balance the protection of victims, the incentive for technological innovation, and the viability of insurance. Among the main challenges are:
- Clarifying how liability is shared between the driver, manufacturer, and insurer depending on the level of automation and the specific circumstances of the accident.
- Adapting insurance policies to scenarios in which failure may be due to technology rather than human behaviour.
- Developing consistent case law that provides predictability for insurers, manufacturers, and users by offering clear criteria on the attribution of liability.
Law firms specialising in insurance defence play a key role, advising on the interpretation of regulations, risk assessment and strategy in the event of an accident, ensuring that the accident is handled in accordance with the law and is fair to all parties.
Accidents involving autonomous vehicles and ADAS systems create a complex civil liability scenario. The allocation of liability depends on the level of automation, the role of the driver, the existence of system defects and insurance coverage.
In general, the greater the autonomy of the vehicle, the greater the relevance of the manufacturer and the insurer, and the less relevant the driver. However, user supervision remains a critical factor. Legislation and case law are evolving to adapt to this new technological reality, and the intervention of law firms specialising in insurance defence is essential to ensure that claims are handled with legal rigour and fairness for all parties involved.