Login
Powered by
MOMENTUM
MEDIA
Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
As the increase of self-driving and autonomous cars continues to rise, traffic legislation is failing to keep up – leading to some potentially “problematic” issues.
A study by Charles Darwin University (CDU) has raised the “driver dilemma” in Australia, touching on how road traffic laws are specific to human drivers and how this legislation has limited application to automated vehicles.
According to the study, most legislative powers to stop vehicles are subject to a human driver and if they violate road traffic laws, creating a rather grey area when the vehicle is automated. The South Australia road legislation, for example, specifies a driver as a “person”, similar to the legislation in Queensland.
“The driver dilemma can be strongly identified in these stopping powers, all of which are addressed to the ‘driver’,” said lead author and CDU senior lecturer Dr Mark Brady.
“Powers directed to drivers to stop vehicles are problematic when applied to automated vehicles where the automated driving system cannot at law be considered a driver.”
As previously reported by Lawyers Weekly, a similar issue was raised around who cops the blame when a self-driving car crashes. It’s a situation that Slater & Gordon’s head of work and road claims, Bree Smith, touched on.
“As of now, fully autonomous vehicles are not yet legal for public use in Australia, with their operation limited to controlled trials and testing scenarios. However, semi-autonomous features, such as Tesla’s Autopilot, are available and in use by many drivers,” Smith said.
“In traditional vehicle accidents, liability typically rests with the driver who was legally deemed ‘at fault;’ however, the introduction of autonomous systems complicates this.”
Compared to the legislation surrounding potential crashes, the study discovered that apart from areas in Queensland and South Australia, most passenger transport legislation around Australia is vehicle-centric – with NSW being an example.
In NSW, legislation on taxis and hire vehicles specifies authorities are allowed to stop a vehicle regardless of who is driving.
Seeing the rise in self-driving cars, Brady called for legislation to adapt traffic laws to include automated vehicles.
“Passenger transport laws all have explicit objectives about the public interest in safe, efficient, and accessible passenger transport,” Brady said.
“These vehicle-centric powers exist where there were significant public policy grounds to stop vehicles, irrespective of the driver’s conduct.”
As it stands, no national automated vehicle legislation or framework is in place despite the government considering the development of one in 2024.
“There is a suggestion that the familiar ‘rules of the road’ will not be needed in an automated vehicle future. However, in this future roadside enforcement would still need powers to stop vehicles,” said Brady.
“As automation increases, it becomes more problematic who is the driver, in fact and in law, for the purposes of international and national road traffic laws.”
We're evolving — and so should your insights. Heads up — Lawyers Weekly is going premium from 1 May for just $5 a month. Stay informed without missing a beat. More information coming soon.
Get breaking news
Kace O'Neill
