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.

中文翻译：

---

2018 年自动和电动汽车法案第 1 部分及以后：批判性审查

2018 年 7 月 19 日，《2018 年自动和电动汽车法案》(AEVA) 获得御准。随着机动车辆越来越以技术为基础，驾驶辅助设备已经从驾驶员手中接管了许多更普通（并且可能危险）的驾驶方面，因此立法必须与时俱进，以确定各方的责任。汽车保险为涉及车辆的人提供保护，这些人可能因行为者的疏忽而遭受伤害、伤害和损失。这是最常见的驾驶员错误，但也可能包括制造缺陷，导致死亡和不太严重的伤害。这也是侵权法和保险法之间的交叉点需要谨慎管理的地方。要求驾驶员或机动车事故的第三方受害者向制造商寻求对自动驾驶汽车在行动过程中造成的损失的赔偿尤其不公平。消费者法历来为受影响的消费者消除了这种负担，法律在新兴领域保护个人是完全明智的——考虑到具有驾驶员功能的车辆的发展轨迹以及目前具有此类创新的车辆数量，可能更是如此. 然而，AEVA 包含一些令人不安的方面，涉及汽车保险业在该市场的主导地位、强制保险的应用以及责任的排除和限制，这些责任使投保人和受害者面临违反欧盟的风险水平。