Autonomous Vehicles Report 2020 PDF

Global Guide to
Autonomous
Vehicles
2020
Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020 • 1
Contents
04 … Executive Summary
Australia New Zealand

09 … Regulatory overview 51… Regulatory overview
12 … Driverless vehicle testing 52 … Driverless vehicle testing
and deployment and deployment
13 … Liability 54 … Liability
13 … Data privacy and security 56 … Data privacy and security
14 … Telecommunications and 5G 58 … Telecommunications and 5G
Canada United Kingdom

China United States

Germany
39 … Regulatory overview
45 … Driverless vehicle testing
and deployment
46 … Liability
47 … Data privacy and security
48 … Telecommunications and 5G

Executive Summary
Introduction Key findings
As consumers and businesses eagerly anticipate a Governments around the globe, both large and
future in which next-generation autonomous vehicles small, must answer the complex technical, legal and
(AVs) change the definition of mobility as we know regulatory questions plaguing full autonomy. Some of
it, global automakers and technology companies are the key findings across the globe include:
investing heavily in AV research and development.
• Australia requires significant investment to upgrade
Simultaneously, the laws and regulations governing the
its infrastructure, including communications and data
technology and its deployment are rapidly evolving and
access. Some municipalities are actively working
becoming increasingly complex, leaving unanswered
toward this effort with defined plans of action and
questions around safety, liability, privacy and security.
budget estimates.
Drawing on the knowledge and resources of its global,
• Ontario leads testing and development of AV
multidisciplinary Autonomous Vehicles practice,
technology in Canada, while the federal government
Dentons’ “Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020”
has focused on ensuring consistency across
dissects the front-burner policy issues, legislative and
all jurisdictions.
regulatory changes, new legal precedents and leading
global trends shaping the sector. • The Chinese government has taken multiple steps
to prepare national infrastructure for autonomous
In particular, the guide focuses on the following seven vehicles, including defining action plans, publicly
countries whose governments or automotive and soliciting opinions on strategy, promoting relevant
technology industries have taken unique approaches to research and preparing the streets for autonomous
supporting the nascent autonomous vehicles industry: transit.
• Australia • Germany has established a national strategy for AVs
but its federated structure may threaten consistency
• Canada
at the country level.
• China
• The New Zealand government encourages the
• Germany testing of semi and fully autonomous vehicles,
• New Zealand as well as other transport technologies and
innovations in order to facilitate early adoption of
• United Kingdom beneficial technology.
• United States • Recognizing a communications framework will be
For each country, the report examines five key areas: essential for AVs, the U.K. has developed a focused
regulatory landscape; driverless vehicle testing and strategy to become a global leader in 5G technology,
deployment; liability; data privacy and security; and including spectrum allocation.
telecommunications and 5G.
4 • Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020

• In the United States, there is no federal regulatory
framework currently in place to address autonomous
vehicle testing and deployment. As a result, testing
and deployment is regulated by a patchwork of state-
centric laws. Forty states and the District of Columbia
have either passed autonomous vehicle legislation or
are operating under executive orders.
We hope that Dentons’ Global Guide to Autonomous

Vehicles provides you with a closer look at the
developing political and legal landscape for
autonomous vehicles, and the specific opportunities
and challenges across key areas that will define the
global mobility revolution.
For more updates to help you stay connected, click

here to subscribe and to our autonomous vehicles
blog, The Driverless Commute, to get the latest
developments sent straight to your inbox.
Please also be on the lookout for our Global Testing

and Deployment Guide to Autonomous Vehicles,
coming soon. This interactive online tool will provide
effortless access to key self-driving regulations
worldwide and even allows users to create custom
comparison charts across multiple jurisdictions.
This guide is provided for informational purposes only,

and does not constitute advice or guidance. If you have
questions regarding any of the covered countries, the
guide includes the names and contact details of local
lawyers and professionals who are able to assist. If you
have questions of a more general nature, about the
guide or the sector overall, please feel free to contact
our Autonomous Vehicles practice leader via email at
[email protected].

Overview
Australia
At present the National Transport Commission (NTC) is working towards
creating an end to end regulatory system that will allow for the safe,
commercial deployment of automated vehicles in Australia. As part of
that effort, the NTC is currently analyzing options and issues in relation to
changing driving laws to support automated vehicles.
Canada
In Canada, autonomous vehicles are subject to regulation at all three levels
of government: (i) federal; (ii) provincial and territorial; and (iii) municipal.
At present most of the regulatory activity is concentrated at the federal
level; in the provinces of British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec; and in a
few municipalities. Overall, the government of Canada remains optimistic
about the future of autonomous transport while also operating cautiously
to ensure its rollout is safe and widely beneficial.
China
The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, Ministry of Public
Security and Ministry of Transport on April 3, 2018, promulgated the
Regulations on the Administration of Road Testing of Autonomous Vehicles
(for Trial Implementation) to advance the transformation, upgrading and
innovation of transportation, and to regulate the administration of road
testing of autonomous vehicles.

Germany
Overall, the German federal government welcomes further developments in the field of autonomous driving. Its
aim is to strengthen the German economic position in this sector. In its “Strategy for Automated and Connected
Driving,” which was formulated in 2015, Germany has set the goal of ensuring that Germany remains the “lead
supplier for automated and connected vehicles” and becomes the “lead market.” The introduction of autonomous
vehicles into public road traffic is to be facilitated in particular, by adapting the legal situation.
New Zealand
Neither the Land Transport Act 1998 (LTA) nor any of the Land Transport Rules specifically regulate the use of
autonomous vehicles.
In addition, nothing in either the LTA or any of the Land Transport Rules expressly prohibits or restricts the use of
autonomous vehicles once they are registered and licensed. However, broadly speaking, autonomous vehicles
must comply with the requirements of both.
United Kingdom
The government believes that connected and automated vehicles can change the way people travel, making
transport safer, smoother and more accessible to those with mobility issues. By working closely with industry,
academia and regulators, the government aims to make the UK a premier development location for connected
and automated vehicles.
United States
The United States does not have a federal regulatory framework currently in place to address autonomous vehicle
testing and deployment. As a result, testing and deployment is regulated by a patchwork of state-centric laws.
That patchwork is made up of 40 states and DC that have either passed autonomous vehicle legislation or are
operating under executive orders.

Australia

Regulatory overview
In Australia, each state and territory has enacted its own road safety laws. That is, road safety is not regulated by a
harmonized federal (i.e., Australia-wide) law. Moreover, each region has separate regulatory agencies/authorities as
seen below.
Region Agency
Road Transport Information Management

Australian Capital
Territory (ATC)
Transport Canberra
Transport for NSW

New South Wales
(NSW)
Roads and Maritime Services
Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment

Northern Territory
(NT)
Northern Territory Department of Transport
Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads
South Australia
Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure
(SA)
Tasmania Department of State Growth
Transport for Victoria

Victoria (VIC)
VicRoads
Department of Transport
Western Australia
(WA)
Main Roads Western Australia
In order to address the inconsistencies between the various states and territories, the National Transport
Commission (NTC)1 introduced the Australian Road Rules (ARRs) to unify the nation’s road safety laws. The ARRs
are model laws which have been implemented in each state and territory.
1 The NTC is an independent advisory body responsible for the productivity, safety and environmental performance of Australia’s road, rail and
intermodal transport systems.

The NTC has implemented a regulatory roadmap in phases to ensure different levels of automation may be
commercially deployed. Relevantly:
In November 2016, Australian

transport ministers agreed to
a phased reform program so
that conditionally automated
(i.e., SAE Level 3) vehicles could
operate safely and legally on
Australian roads before 2020,
In May 2017, the guidelines for and highly and fully automated
trials of automated vehicles in vehicles from 2020.
Australia and accompanying
policy paper were released
following approval by
transport ministers.
In October 2017, the NTC consulted

on the discussion paper “Changing
driving laws to support automated
In November 2017, vehicles,” which seeks to clarify
the National Enforcement how current driver and driving laws
Guidelines for Automated apply to automated vehicles and
Vehicles (Guidelines) and who would be legally responsible for
accompanying policy their operation.
paper were released
following approval by
transport ministers.
In May 2018, the Safety
Assurance for Automated
Driving Systems Consultation
Regulation Impact Statement
was released.
In November 2018,
the Safety Assurance for
Automated Driving Systems:
Decision Regulation
Impact Statement was
In March 2019, the House released following
of Representatives Standing approval by transport and
Committee on Infrastructure, infrastructure ministers.
Transport and Cities released its
final committee report ‘Innovating
Transport across Australia’.
In October 2019, the NTC

released its Automated Vehicle
Program, which incorporates the
work completed to date, further
planned reform and interaction
In November 2019, with other agencies.
the NTC released its
National Transport
Reform Implementation
Monitoring Report.
At present the NTC is working towards creating an end to end regulatory system that will allow
for the safe, commercial deployment of automated vehicles in Australia. As part of that effort,
the NTC is currently analyzing options and issues in relation to changing driving laws to support
automated vehicles.

While a handful of political leaders have taken in interest in autonomous transit, Hon Michael McCormack MP
(Deputy Prime Minister)2 and Paul Fletcher (Minister for Communications, Cyber Safety and the Arts)3 have been
particularly outspoken about preparing Australia for the autonomous revolution.
Hon Michael McCormack

Party leader of the National Party of Australia
"Getting Australians home sooner and safer is a core focus of our
government, and the emergence of automated vehicles represents a
significant opportunity to realize safety and productivity benefits while
supporting Australian industry and innovation."
Paul Fletcher
Minister for Communications, Cyber Safety and the Arts
"This is an important time for industry and government collaboration,
as we need to ensure a clear path for network deployment and
allocation of spectrum is developed to enable an effective 5G future
that will benefit Australian business and society while keeping Australia
at the forefront of next generation mobile telecommunications."
Additionally, Australia’s transport ministers, through the COAG Transport and Infrastructure Council, have agreed
on the strategic priority of preparing for the deployment of automated vehicles and other innovative transport
technologies. The Council has agreed to a program of national work, which is being implemented collaboratively
by the Australian, state, and territory governments, as well as intergovernmental organizations such as Austroads
and the National Transport Commission. 4
2 https://www.afr.com/news/politics/driverless-cars-get-10m-federal-boost-20181004-h167fz
3 https://www.afr.com/business/telecommunications/new-comms-minister-eyes-5g-industry-opportunities-20190527-p51rgu
4 https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/transport/automatedvehicles/preparing-for-automated-vehicles.aspx

That being said, significant investment needs human driver. Where there is a human driver, associated
to be made to upgrade infrastructure, including human factor risks will also need to be considered,
communications and access to data. including such behavioral requirements as alertness and
ability to resume the entire driving task if requested or if
Municipalities have taken a leading role in that effort. there is an evident vehicle system failure.
For example: NSW has implemented a “Connected To that end, while not driving, the human driver must
and Automated Vehicles Plan”5 ; and VIC has released not engage in activities that prevent him or her from
advice indicating that while Victoria is well placed for responding to takeover demands. Activities not in line
the roll out of new vehicles, significant investment with the intended use of the automated driving function
will be required to fully maximize their potential.6 This or prohibited by law include:
includes:
• Reading or viewing a device or thing unrelated to
• Up to $1.7 billion to upgrade mobile networks navigation or driving (ARR, Rule 299)
• Around $250 million for improved line markings • Using a laptop (ARR, Rule 299)
on roads
• Using a mobile phone, except in permitted
• At least $2.2 billion for energy network upgrades. circumstances (ARR, Rule 300)
Driverless vehicle testing Throughout vehicle testing, record keeping

requirements apply. Generally speaking, trialing
and deployment organizations should comply with all relevant crash
reporting requirements, and report on incidents
Trialing of driverless vehicles is permitted in Australia involving the automated driving system to authorities.
upon grant of a relevant permit from each relevant
state/territory. Generally, “trial permits” are granted on a
case-by-case basis.
Certain states (such as Victoria) require the application

for a trial permit to prepare a safety management
plan that complies with NTC guidelines. Regardless
of jurisdiction, appropriate safety hardware/software
Spotlight
must be established in a safety management plan that Integration of autonomous technology into public
complies with NTC guidelines. Whether or not vehicles transportation systems
must have the capability to be remotely operated is New South Wales is trialing an automated shuttle bus at
dependent on the safety management plan. Typically, Sydney Olympic Park. Partners in the project, announced
Australian road rules require a person to be seated in the in 2017, include HMI Technologies, NRMA, Telstra, IAG
and Sydney Olympic Park Authority. South Australia is
driver’s seat. Certain states, such as NSW and SA require conducting similar bus and shuttle trials.
the trialing organization to have third-party policy and/or
public liability insurance.
A human driver will be required in the vehicle unless a

specific exemption or permit has been granted. As such
it is possible that vehicles trialed in Australia will not
have human drivers. In this case trialing organizations
simply need to demonstrate how they have addressed
the relevant safety risks of not having the backup of a
5 https://future.transport.nsw.gov.au/plans/connected-and-automated-vehicles-plan
6 http://www.infrastructurevictoria.com.au/project/automated-and-zero-emission-vehicle-infrastructure/

As it relates to commercial deployment, Australia
is currently trialing driverless vehicles. As such,
Data privacy and security
consumers have not been permitted to use driverless The Privacy Act 1988 (Privacy Act) (and its
vehicles for personal use. accompanying Australian Privacy Principles (APPs))
regulates the management, storage, access and
Liability correction of personal information about individuals.
This includes the collection of information from use of
In the event of a crash involving an autonomous vehicle: autonomous vehicles.
• The Australian Consumer Law (ACL) provides a An autonomous vehicle will also likely collect
regulatory system of obligations and warranties in information about its users for the purpose of access
order for manufacturers to meet quality and safety (for example, facial recognition information) as well as
standards; and location information (where a person goes, how long a
• Each state and territory has its own Civil Liability person was at a location for, the next destinations) and
Act for personal injuries caused by motor preferences (for example, air conditioning temperature,
vehicle accidents. music etc.). Some of this information about users will
likely be classified as personal information and as such,
While the usual negligence principles apply, there will any collection and use will be subject to the Privacy Act
be additional issues regarding liability for compensation. 1988 requirements.
For example, there will be issues as to who will bear
responsibility for harm with respect to higher levels Data is only allowed to be stored and transmitted if:
of automation. Under the ACL, manufacturers and
• Collection of personal information is relevant to the
suppliers (such as sellers and resellers) may be
functions and activities of the vehicle;
held liable.
• A person is aware of personal information collection
In October 2017, the NTC released a discussion paper
and how that information is used through an up-to-
titled “Changing driving laws to support automated
date privacy policy and collection notices provided at
vehicles” (Discussion Paper).7 The Discussion Paper
the time information is collected;
provides in-depth analysis of the need to legally
recognize an ADS in Australia. It explains that an • Use and disclosure of personal information is
Automated Driving System (ADS) is a system—not a consistent with the purpose for which it is collected,
person—so it cannot be held responsible for its actions. has the individual’s consent, and is for limited other
An entity needs to be responsible for the actions of an purposes; and
ADS to ensure they can operate safely. • Personal information is secure.
In its Automated Vehicle Program8 released in October Consumers have the right to alter and correct their
2019, the NTC confirmed it will consider data from own personal information. An APP entity must take
insurers to assess and manage liability for road traffic reasonable steps to destroy personal information
law breaches and crashes. or ensure it is de-identified if it no longer needs the
information for any purpose for which it may be used
or disclosed under the APPs. However, in Australia, we
do not have the equivalent “right to be forgotten” under
the GDPR.
7 https://www.ntc.gov.au/Media/Reports/(E5695ACE-993C-618F-46E1-A876391B8CD9).pdf
8 https://www.ntc.gov.au/transport-reform/automated-vehicle-program

Cybersecurity is regulated by the Privacy and its APPs.
For example, the APPs prescribe that:
• Organizations must take reasonable steps to

protect personal information that they hold from
misuse, interference, loss and unauthorised access,
modification or disclosure;
• Organizations must also take reasonable steps to

destroy or de-identify personal information they hold
if it is no longer needed to any purpose for which
it may be used or disclosed, it is not contained in a
Commonwealth record, and the entity is not required
by or under an Australian law or a court or tribunal
order to retain it.
More recently, the Australian federal government

introduced the Notifiable Data Breaches Scheme to
manage cybersecurity accountability.
Telecommunications
and 5G
Following industry consultation, the Australian
Communications and Media Authority introduced the
Radio communications (Intelligent Transport Systems)
Class License 2017, which will support the use of
complying wireless technologies and devices. The
regulations allow the 5.9 GHz band to be used for ITS in
Australia, and are consistent with the ITS arrangements
in major vehicle markets such as the US and EU.9 In
the Australian context, short-range 5.9 GHz radios
accommodate 4G C- V2X technology.
Spotlight
South Australia
• Future Mobility Lab Fund: a $10 million program spanning over three years for development, testing and
demonstrations of CAV technology, connected V2V and V2I pilots and demonstrations, and research and
development
Victoria
• ITS Grants Program: includes project trialing CAVs in highway scenarios, C-ITS to support tram priority, and
in-vehicle connected vehicle services using cellular communications
9 https://www.acma.gov.au/Industry/Spectrum/Spectrum-planning/About-spectrum-planning/acma-introduces-new-regulations-to-support-
intelligent-transport-systems

Canada

Regulatory overview
In Canada, autonomous vehicles are subject to regulation at all three levels of government: (i) federal; (ii) provincial
and territorial; and (iii) municipal. At present most of the regulatory activity is concentrated at the federal level; in
the provinces of British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec; and in a few municipalities. Overall, the government of
Canada remains optimistic about the future of autonomous transport while also operating cautiously to ensure its
rollout is safe and widely beneficial.
The federal government is responsible for manufacturing and infrastructure as it relates to vehicles. The provinces
and territories are responsible for the licensing of drivers, vehicle registration and insurance, and laws and
regulations regarding the safe operation of vehicles on public roads. The regulatory agencies in the most relevant
jurisdictions are as follows:
Region Agency
Transport Canada: Sets and enforces compliance with safety standards for manufactured and
imported vehicles.
Federal
Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISEDC): Sets and enforces compliance with
technical standards relating to wireless technology integrated in vehicles and roadside infrastructure.
Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure: Plans transportation networks, provides transport
British Columbia
infrastructure, develops transportation polices and enforces related acts and regulations.
Ministry of Transportation (MTO): Oversees licensing of drivers, vehicle registration and insurance, and
Ontario
regulates the safe operation of vehicles on public roads.
Societe de l’assurance du Quebec (SAAQ): Enforces the Highway Safety Code, which covers the use of
Quebec
vehicles, pedestrian traffic and road safety in the province.
The federal government has not introduced an overarching policy for autonomous vehicles (AVs). However, the
Canadian Senate has provided guidance to federal agencies to take a policy leadership role and to guide provinces
in facilitating trials.
Specifically, the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications provided guidance through 16
recommendations to Transport Canada and ISEDC to build a coordinated national strategy on automated and
connected vehicles. Those recommendations include, among other things, that the ISEDC allocate spectrum for
connected vehicles uses, and in cooperation with Transport Canada, create a policy unit to coordinate federal
efforts on automated and connected vehicles. It is also recommended that Transport Canada engage with
provincial governments through the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (CCMTA) to develop a
model provincial policy for the use of automated and connected vehicles.10
At present, Transport Canada and the CCMTA set testing guidelines for the provinces for levels 3, 4 and 5 driving
automation systems. Any trial organization must ensure that the highly automated vehicle (HAV) conforms to
the federal Motor Vehicle Safety Act (MVSA), and if wireless technologies are involved, ensure compliance with
ISED certification and licensing requirements.11 Additionally, the trial organization must comply with each of the
provinces’ licensing, registration and insurance requirements. The CCMTA’s Canadian Jurisdictional Guidelines for
the Safe Testing and Deployment of Highly Automated Vehicles (HAV Testing Guidelines) supplements the testing
guidelines and provides additional guidance on how to prepare and roll out AVs and maintain road safety.12
10 https://sencanada.ca/content/sen/committee/421/TRCM/Reports/COM_RPT_TRCM_AutomatedVehicles_e.pdf
11 https://www.tc.gc.ca/en/services/road/safety-standards-vehicles-tires-child-car-seats/testing-highly-automated-vehicles-canada.html
12 https://www.ccmta.ca/images/publications/pdf/CCMTA-AVGuidelines-sm.pdf

Moreover, Transport Canada provided policy guidance on safety in its report, Safety Assessment for Automated
Driving Systems in Canada, to assist ADS developers. Safety in the context of ADS primarily relates to:
• The design and validation of the vehicle;
• Safety systems within the vehicle for driver accessibility; and
• Cybersecurity and data management.13
Canada’s Safety Framework for Automated and Connected Vehicles not only provides guidance for the safe
deployment of automated and connected vehicles on public roads, but also sets out a flexible approach by utilizing
non-regulatory tools to support safe testing of ADS.14
In addition to Testing Highly Automated Vehicles in Canada, the federal government’s testing guidelines for
provinces, adopted on May 15, 2018, there are a few other ongoing regulatory projects of note:15
British Columbia Ontario Quebec
The Ministry of Transportation and The MTO launched a 10-year pilot SAAQ has opened the door to the
Infrastructure has an AV Working program in 2016 to test AVs. In 2019, the implementation of pilot projects to test
Group that monitors progress within program was updated. Now the pilot only AVs. The Highway Safety Code (HSC)
the AV field, but there is no timetable applies to levels 4 and 5 automation (as was amended in 2018 to introduce an
for testing policies. Nothing related defined by the SAE). Levels 1 through 3 autonomous vehicle definition and
to developing the AV industry was are permitted on Ontario’s public roads.16 create an avenue for a pilot project
included in the 2019 BC budget. approval.17
13 https://www.tc.gc.ca/en/services/road/documents/tc_safety_assessment_for_ads-s.pdf
14 https://www.tc.gc.ca/en/services/road/documents/tc_safety_framework_for_acv-s.pdf
15 https://www.tc.gc.ca/en/services/road/safety-standards-vehicles-tires-child-car-seats/testing-highly-automated-vehicles-canada.html
16 http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/vehicles/automated-vehicles.shtml
17 https://saaq.gouv.qc.ca/en/road-safety/modes-transportation/autonomous-vehicles/

Driverless vehicle testing and deployment
Notably, the regulation of public roads falls under provincial and territorial authority. Provincial regulations do not
require a backup driver for test vehicles. There are no provincial or territorial vehicle safety rules that permit or
restrict AVs from operation.
Region Agency
At the federal level, MVSA section 7(1)(a) permits testing. In addition, it is important to note section
7(1)(a)—an exception that allows people or companies to temporarily import a vehicle that does not
Federal
comply with the Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, if the vehicle is for testing, demonstration or
evaluation.18 The Transport Canada’s Innovation Centre also permits testing of AV truck platooning.
British Columbia does not have any AV testing regulations. The province will likely follow the CCMTA’s
HAV Testing Guidelines when implementing testing regulations but at present the vehicle must comply
British Columbia
with MVSA regulations. Additionally, the company will likely have to make a declaration that they have
addressed any safety concerns associated with the trial AVs.
The MTO’s Automated Vehicle Pilot Program permits companies to apply to test driverless vehicles
on public roads. The program prohibits the use of AVs (levels 4 and 5) except as permitted by the
pilot project. If the vehicle was originally manufactured as an AV, the owner must be the original
manufacturer and be a company as defined by the MSVA. If the vehicle was converted into an AV,
the owner must be the person who converted the vehicle, and must be a tech company, research
institution or AV manufacturer. The Registrar must be satisfied that the owner has expertise to
Ontario properly convert vehicles into AVs. In addition, the vehicle must have a disengagement/engagement
mechanism, failure alert, and mechanism enabling the driver to take over all dynamic driving tasks.
Finally, companies must obtain approval from the MTO in order to test AVs (levels 4 and 5) and have a
minimum CA$5 million in liability insurance (CA$8 million for vehicles with a seating capacity of eight or
more passengers).
Pilot project applications must be evaluated and accepted by the Minister.

Quebec’s HSC allows for AV testing applications but does not specify terms for AV testing if the
application is approved. The CCMTA’s HAV Testing Guidelines will likely be followed when the province
Quebec implements testing regulations. The vehicle must comply with MVSA regulations and the company will
likely have to make a declaration that they have addressed any safety concerns associated with the trial
AVs.
The CCMTA recommends any testing regulations be at least as strict as those implemented in Ontario,
therefore, a disengagement/engagement mechanism, failure alert, and mechanism enabling the driver
to take over all dynamic driving tasks, are all likely to be required for AVs that are operated with a driver.
Additionally, companies will need to obtain a test permit pursuant to an approved application to test
Other Canadian
on public roads and have a minimum of CA$5M in liability insurance coverage and beyond CA$5M
jurisdictions
when testing larger vehicles (8 or more passenger capacity). Moreover, employees of the company
testing the AV will likely be required to complete training (provided by the company) with respect to the
capabilities and limitations of the test vehicle. The training logs must be submitted to the applicable
provincial agency.
In sum, the federal government has taken on a leadership role to ensure consistency across all jurisdictions by
providing guidance on the future of the AV industry. The current regulatory environment is supportive of the
development and use of AVs and Ontario is the leader for testing and developing AV technology in Canada.
In regard to vehicle deployment, licensing and registration in Canada falls under the provincial jurisdiction. While
there are no specific regulations on deployment in British Columbia, in Ontario, Regulation 517/18 under the
18 https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/m-10.01/FullText.html

Highway Traffic Act prohibits individual consumers from
putting an AV (SAE levels 4 and 5) on public roads.19
Similarly, in Quebec, An Act to amend the Highway Spotlight
Safety Code and other provisions prohibits consumers
from having an AV (SAE levels 3—5) on public roads.
Toronto is teaming up with the Toronto
The provincial statutes do not directly address Transit Commission (TTC) and Metrolinx to
consumers taking rides from autonomous vehicles pilot an autonomous shuttle program, set to
operating through companies, and interestingly, in run on public roads, as soon as September
Quebec, an AV shuttle pilot in Candiac is allowed to 2020.
charge customers. Additionally, an electric AV shuttle
The City of Toronto, TTC and Metrolinx put out a
project in Calgary is allowed to charge customers.
public request for information, calling on those
Regardless, companies have to obtain consent for in the tech industry working on automated
transporting consumers in autonomous vehicles. In shuttles to share information on potential
Ontario, companies must obtain consent pursuant to suppliers, related software, and solution
Ontario’s AV Pilot Project regulations in order to put an providers so the city can understand what’s
AV (SAE level 4—5) on the road. In Quebec companies available on the market, and any limitations.21
must obtain consent pursuant to An Act to amend the
Toronto would likely have a vehicle that runs
Highway Safety Code and other provisions to put an AV
along a single route within the city. There will
(SAE level 3—5) on the road and in other jurisdictions
either be one or two vehicles on the route,
companies must obtain the Registrar’s consent.20
depending on what the request for information
research and allocated funding allows for.
Toronto’s City Council has committed to review
the potential of automated public transit within
its municipal transit system.
Toronto is the first city to devote full-time staff

to AVs, and is in the midst of a Three-Year
Automated Vehicles Work Plan which will direct
further investigations into the role that AVs will
play within its transportation system and wider
city planning.22
21 22
19 https://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/R18517
20 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-autonomous-shuttle-zoo-spark-1.4803460
21 https://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Commission_reports_and_information/Commission_meetings/2019/June_12/Reports/18_Automated_Transit_
Shuttle_Pilot_Project.pdf
22 http://www.mondaq.com/canada/x/705898/cycling+rail+road
The+Connected+City+Autonomous+And+Connected+Vehicles+And+The+Future+Of+Living

Liability ii. No-fault liability: Traditionally, a no-fault liability
regime prohibits accident victims from suing
Canada has not defined what particular liability regimes other drivers, unless their injuries reach a certain
apply to AVs in the event of an accident. However, it degree of severity. In the context of AV accidents,
is reasonable to presume that anyone who causes or the no-fault regime may be extended to preclude
contributes to an accident may be liable. Accordingly, claims against other drivers altogether, on the basis
relevant liability regimes will depend on a variety of that relief from an accident flows directly from
factors, including the degree of the vehicle’s autonomy, the manufacturer or their insurance company. As
and the nature of the accident. The degree of responsibility for the accident shifts away from
autonomy in particular will likely cause a policy-driven the driver, no-fault systems may become more
shift that legislators will need to consider. prevalent. Also, it will become increasingly difficult
to attribute liability to the driver in circumstances
The extent of liability, including who may be where the driver has become a passenger.24
responsible, will largely depend on the vehicle’s degree Changes to provincial motor vehicle legislation
of autonomy, and an analysis of the various inputs to defining who the “operator” of an AV is may come
the AV’s system. The range of potentially liable persons into play.
is expansive, and includes drivers, manufacturers and
anyone who could be responsible at law for creating a iii. Strict liability: Strict liability could be an
dangerous situation. alternative to negligence-based liability. This would
be particularly relevant in the event that AVs were
Generally, discussion of liability in the AV context deemed non-compliant with MVSA standards.
explores (i) traditional negligence, (ii) no fault liability, Strict liability holds the defendant, in this case the
(iii) strict liability, (iv) product liability, (v) negligence manufacturer or the driver, legally responsible for
per se and (vi) criminal liability, as potentially the accident, regardless of whether a negligent or
applicable regimes. intentional act was committed.25 This theory may
be especially applicable to drivers of early market
i. Traditional negligence: Drivers have a duty
autonomous vehicles because they will likely be
to take reasonable care in the operation of their
more knowledgeable of the risks that driving AVs
vehicle. Drivers are liable for damages they cause
entails, and may consequently bear the associated
in violation of this duty of reasonable care.23 In
costs from accidents regardless of whether they are
traditional rules of negligence, the wrongdoer
legally at fault.26 However, if the auto-pilot feature
must compensate the victim for the harm suffered.
of a vehicle is engaged, and the driver’s use of that
This liability regime may be an appropriate fit for
feature was proper, it may be difficult to argue that
discerning liability in the context of AV accidents,
the driver was at fault.
because its basis in “reasonableness” offers the
requisite flexibility for responding to society’s iv. Product liability: Liability in the event of
evolving understanding of AV technology and an accident will inevitably shift towards the
capabilities. Contemporary resolutions are highly manufacturer as the particular technology retains
influenced by a mandatory-insurance regime that greater control over the vehicle. Product liability
distributes liability according to the particulars claims are based in negligence. In Ontario, there
of each accident, as outlined by corresponding are three main types of negligence establishing tort
statutory guidelines. liability for damages or injuries caused by defective
products: (a) negligent manufacture, (b) negligent
23 James M Anderson et al, Autonomous Vehicle Technology: A Guide for Policymakers (2016), Rand Corporation, at 112. [Autonomous Vehicle
Technology: A Guide for Policy Makers]
24 Ibid at 118.
25 CED (online) Torts, Principles of Liability (II.1.(c))
26 Autonomous Vehicle Technology: A Guide for Policy Makers supra note 1 at 114.

design, and (c) failure to warn.27 It is the obligation AVs raises a number of issues for traditional criminal
of the plaintiff in product liability litigation to applications; these issues proliferate as control
demonstrate that negligence exists. The defendant of the vehicle shifts from driver to operator. For
can rebut the presumption of negligence by example, legislators will have to consider whether to
producing evidence that demonstrates how they place criminal responsibility in the event of a hack,
are not responsible. technological malfunction, terrorist attacks, drug
trafficking and other criminal activity that could
While this liability regime seems applicable in utilize AVs .29
theory, it may be unsuitable for victims of AV
In sum, whether the fleet operator, seller, re-seller
accidents in practice. The development of an
or parts manufacturer could be liable in the event
AV transportation system involves inputs from
of an accident depends on the nature of the legal
various design and system authorities. The systems
relationship with the plaintiff. It will also depend on
authority would ensure that, when these groups
the nature of the specific AV accident, although, for
are brought together, the result is a functional
sellers and resellers, in particular, liability will likely hinge
and safe system.28 The rollout of a continent wide
on whether they are involved in the manufacture or
transportation system would require collaboration
operation of the AV. Further, whether the test driver or
amongst all of these parties, possibly contributing
negligent hiring standards are to blame will depend
to ambiguity about overall responsibility for vehicle
on the circumstances of the case. While no such case
safety. Accordingly, diagnosing a specific product
exists in Canada, it is more likely that enforcement will
defect will be very difficult, as will be determining
turn to the manufacturer, before attributing liability to
who should be responsible for the defect. The
the test driver or negligent hiring standards.
requisite due diligence associated with the
discovery process will require substantial expertise As previously stated, there is no current federal law
and time; it will likely be too expensive for individual regulating automated driving. Legislative power for laws
claimants. on automated driving will principally arise in federal,
provincial, and territorial jurisdictions as the technology
v. Negligence per se: In the AV context, a
continues to evolve.30 Responsibilities for AVs will be
negligence per se regime would inevitably
shared between federal and provincial powers, owing
require a statute to be passed or regulations to be
to Canada’s constitutional framework. That being said
established providing the requisite rules to which
there are a few preexisting laws and guidelines of note
manufacturers and design and system authorities
that may address liability on a case-by-case basis.
must adhere. Liability would be found when a party
Including:
failed to abide by the established rules.
• The MVSA safety standards for vehicles.
This liability regime may be more advantageous
than traditional negligence or strict liability • The federal Criminal Code requirements for the
standards because it allows injured parties to safe operation of a motor vehicle which prohibit
recover damages, while still promoting the dangerous and careless driving.
development of safe autonomous vehicles. • Transport Canada guidelines, released April 12,
2019, that direct the safe conduct of automated
vi. Criminal liability: Traditionally, criminal liability
vehicle trials in Canada, agreed upon by federal,
applies to any vehicular crime that has a mens rea
provincial and territorial representatives of the
requirement. However, the autonomous element of
27 Peter Vlaar, “From Motorist to Manufacturer: Adjusting to AV Litigation” (2018) McCague Borlack (online).
28 Roger Kemp, Autonomous Vehicles-Who Will Be Liable for Accidents, (2018) 15 Digital Evidence & Electric Signature LR 33 at 37.
29 Frank Douma & Sarah Palodichuk, Criminal Liability Issues Created by Autonomous Vehicles (2012) 52 Santa Clara LR 4 at
1163. [Criminal Liability Issues Created by Autonomous Vehicles]
30 Jonathan Cocker “Global Driverless Vehicle Survey” (2017) Baker McKenzie Report.

Canadian Council for Motor Transport Administrators The federal Personal Information Protection and
(CCMTA).31 The guidelines are intended to cover Electronic Documents Act (SC 2000, c 5), commonly
temporary trials of AVs, not their permanent known as PIPEDA, applies to the collection, use and
market deployment. disclosure of personal data (referred to as “personal
information” in Canadian legislation) by private sector
Provincial policy statements also shed light on liability
organizations in the course of commercial activities.
issues in certain circumstances:
British Columbia, Alberta and Quebec have enacted
• The Ministry of Ontario has mandated that drivers will
private sector statutes substantially similar to PIPEDA.
still need to be in full care and control of vehicles with
Where an activity involving personal data takes place
SAE level 3 technology and all existing laws (such
wholly within a province, provincial privacy legislation
as distracted, careless and impaired driving laws)
will apply. Where no provincial privacy legislation
will continue to apply to drivers of these vehicles.
exists, or where personal data crosses provincial
Drivers are responsible for the safe operation of these
or international borders, PIPEDA will apply. Original
vehicles at all times.32
equipment manufacturers, technology companies
• Ontario has adopted the Ontario Regulation 306/15 and other private sector organizations involved in
Pilot Project – Autonomous Vehicles, Highway Traffic autonomous vehicles will be subject to PIPEDA and/or
Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8 (Ontario Pilot Project), which one of the provincial statutes.
accepts the autonomous vehicle definitions set out in
SAE J3016. These guidelines establish standardized Every jurisdiction in Canada has enacted public sector
language and principles for the AV industry, but do privacy legislation. Federally, the Privacy Act (RSC
not create guidelines to discern liability.33 1985, c P-21) governs the collection, use and storage of
personal data by federal public sector organizations.
In conclusion, liability concerns that stem from This legislation applies to government ministries,
autonomous vehicles is, for the most part, uncharted institutions and agencies of the federal government,
territory. As the legal structure develops so will our such as Transport Canada. Each province has similar
understanding of potential exposure to liability. legislation governing the collection, storage and
use of personal data in the provincial public sector,
Data privacy and security which includes municipalities. Public sector entities
responsible for the infrastructure around autonomous
Canada’s national and provincial data protection laws vehicles will be subject to public sector statute.
are principles-based and provide a pragmatic and
flexible framework that attempts to balance the right of In the case of public-private partnerships or
an individual to control the collection, use, disclosure other consortium-based activities, the individual
and retention of their personal data with the legitimate participating entities will each be governed by different
business interests of organizations that seek to use privacy legislation.
that personal data. In Canada, there are separate laws
Private sector privacy laws are consent-based, meaning
regarding the collection, use and disclosure of personal
that subject to limited exceptions, private sector
data in the private sector, the public sector as well as
organizations must obtain consent (implied or express,
the healthcare sector.
depending on a number of factors) from individuals
for the collection, use and disclosure of their personal
information. In order for consent to be valid, it must be
31 Ibid.
32 Ministry of Transportation, “Ontario’s Automated Vehicle Pilot Program” online:
http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/vehicles/automated-vehicles.shtml. SAE Level 3 is “conditional automation”, where the driver is a
necessity, but not required to monitor the environment.
33 SAE International, “Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Autonomous Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles
J3016” (2018) online: https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/13069a-ads2.0_090617_v9a_tag.pdf at 4.

reasonable to expect that individuals would understand of personal information. These safeguards should
the nature, purpose and consequences of the contemplate the secure transmission and storage of
collection, use or disclosure of the personal information personal information.
to which they are consenting. In other words, even if
Under public sector legislation, many jurisdictions
an organization obtained consent, organizations may
have formal requirements whereby the public body
collect, use and disclose personal information only for
is to establish and maintain appropriate safeguards
purposes that a reasonable person would consider
against such risks as accidental loss or alteration, and
is appropriate given the circumstances. For example,
unauthorized access, collection, use, disclosure
collecting the number of passengers in an autonomous
or disposal.
vehicle for the purpose of safety measures would be
reasonable; whereas collecting passenger ethnicity Personal information collected by an institution that is
for the purposes of serving advertisements via the subject to the provincial public sector privacy law in
infotainment system may be found unreasonable. British Columbia or Nova Scotia may not transfer that
personal information outside Canada or otherwise
For public sector bodies, all jurisdictions in Canada link
allow access to that personal information from outside
the collection of personal information to a purpose.
Public sector institutions may not collect personal Canada, subject to certain exceptions. Therefore, a
private sector company, such as a cloud-based service
information unless the purpose for such collection
or vehicle manufacturer working with the public sector
is one enumerated in the organization’s applicable
in British Columbia or Nova Scotia may be prohibited
statute. For the most part, the permissible purposes for
from storing personal information outside of Canada.
collection fall into three general categories:
Additionally, many provincial and federal public sector
• The information collection activity is expressly bodies have formal policies requiring data localization
authorized by the statute; of personal information and in some cases,
information generally.
• The information relates directly to and is necessary
for the operating program or activity of that public Under private sector and public sector data protection
body; and legislation, individuals have a right to access the
• The information is collected for law enforcement. information held about them. The maximum period
that organizations have to respond varies. Under
As a result, public bodies such as municipalities or PIPEDA, responses to such requests must be within
electricity distributors may only collect the personal 30 days. This timeline can be extended in certain
information necessary in order to provide the cases. All access provisions contain exceptions. For
autonomous vehicle services. example, under PIPEDA, access may be refused if
Privacy laws do not prescribe how often information providing access would reveal confidential commercial
can be accessed. Generally, control of access is information, or providing access could reasonably be
regarded as a safeguard measure, where access is expected to threaten the life or security of another
limited to authorized individuals who require access individual, or if data was generated in the course of a
in order to perform their obligations. This is generally formal dispute process.
stipulated in internal policies and procedures, as well as
Canadian legislation does not contain an express right
set out in contractual arrangements between parties,
to erasure; however, an individual may withdraw their
including between a public sector body and privacy
consent to the processing of his or her personal data
sector organization.
under Canadian private sector legislation. If there is
PIPEDA and provincial private sector statutes no further legitimate purpose for which the personal
require organizations to implement safeguards that data can be lawfully retained, this may involve the
are appropriate to the sensitivity of the personal requirement to delete the personal information.
information. Safeguards should include physical,
Further, individuals have the right to correct their
technical and administrative controls to prevent loss or
personal information under most Canadian privacy
unauthorized access to or modification or disclosure
statutes. The right to correction may also include the

right to have incorrect data deleted or noted as being Finally, Transport Canada included cybersecurity and
in dispute. The rights are subject to any statutory data management policy guidance in its report Safety
requirements that may impose retention periods, Assessment for Automated Driving Systems in Canada to
preventing a request for delete. Notably, data that has assist developers of automated driving systems.
been aggregated or anonymized does not need to
be deleted. Telecommunications
There are no specific Internet of things (IoT) statutes
that govern consumer data. The data collected by IoT
and 5G
would be governed by either the private sector regime The government of Canada recognizes that the
or public sector regime, or both, depending on the development and deployment of 5G is essential
organizations involved, the data and the purpose. to Canada becoming a global center for wireless
innovation and for ensuring that Canada is at the
Canada has not yet enacted cybersecurity legislation.
forefront of digital development and that Canadians
However, the Government of Canada has been active
have access to world-leading wireless infrastructure.
in promoting cybersecurity. Public Safety Canada is
The Government of Canada has incentivized 5G
mandated to keep Canadians safe from a range of risks
technology by releasing wireless spectrum for 5G34 and
and manages the Canadian Cyber Incident Response
making strategic investments in 5G technologies and
Centre. Many government agencies are responsible for
infrastructure.35
enforcing cybersecurity rules within their jurisdiction,
including, but not limited to, law enforcement, That being said, as it relates to vehicle communication,
Public Safety Canada, the Communications Security ISED has not taken a position on whether it prefers
Establishment, the Royal Canadian Mounted Policy, the dedicated short-range communication (DSRC) or
Canadian Security Intelligence Service and the Office cellular vehicle-to-everything (C-V2X).
of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada.
34 ISED, “Decision on Revisions to the 3500 MHz Band to Accommodate Flexible Use and Preliminary Decisions on Changes to the 3800 MHz Band”
(June 2019) SLPB-001-19, online: <https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/vwapj/SLPB-001 19EN.pdf/$file/SLPB-001-19EN.pdf>; ISED, “Consultation
on Revisions to 3500 MHz Band to Accommodate Flexible Use and Preliminary Consultation on Changes to the 3800 MHz Band” (June 2018) SLPB-004-
28 at 1-6, online: <https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/vwapj/3500-Consultation02-2018-EN.pdf/$file/3500-Consultation02-2018-EN.pdf>; ISED,
“Technical, Policy and Licensing Framework for Spectrum in the 600 MHz Band” (March 2018) SLPB-002-18 at 6, online: <https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/
smt-gst.nsf/vwapj/SLPB-002-18-600MHz-decision-e.pdf/$FILE/SLPB-002-18-600MHz-decision-e.pdf>; ISED, “Consultation on Releasing Millimetre Wave
Spectrum to Support 5G” (June 2017) SLPB-001-17, online: < https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/vwapj/slpb-001-17-5G.pdf/$file/slpb-001-17-5G.pdf >;
ISED, “Addendum to the Consultation on Releasing Millimetre Wave Spectrum to Support 5G” (June 2018) SLPB-005-18, online: < https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/
site/smt-gst.nsf/vwapj/Addendum-2018-EN.pdf/$FILE/Addendum-2018-EN.pdf >; ISED, “Decision on Releasing Millimetre Wave Spectrum to Support 5G”
(June 2019) SLPB-003-19, online: < https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/vwapj/SLPB-003-19EN.pdf/$file/SLPB-003-19EN.pdf >.
35 Government of Canada, “Government of Canada invests in research and development for technologies behind 5G networks” (25 January
2019), online: <https://www.canada.ca/en/innovation-science-economic-development/news/2019/01/government-of-canada-invests-in-research-and-
development-for-technologies-behind-5g-networks.html> [Nokia Investment in 5G]; ISED, “Building a Nation of Innovators” (2019) at 55, online: <https://
www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/062.nsf/vwapj/ISEDC_19-044_INNOVATION-SKILLS_E_web.pdf/$file/ISEDC_19-044_INNOVATION-SKILLS_E_web.pdf> [“Building a
Nation of Innovators”].

The 5850-5925 MHz band has been specifically
designated for use by DSRC for developmental
purposes36 in support of ITS.37 While the band has not
been designated for use by C-V2X, ISED recognizes
that C-V2X is gaining traction internationally and has
indicated that it would be possible to use C-V2X in the
5850-5925 MHz band.38
Equipment in the band operates on a license-exempt

basis. ISED has elected to wait to make any changes in
the 5GHz band until the future international approach
to the band and ITS becomes more clear.39 Should
additional 5GHz bands be made available at WRC-19,
ISED will consider if they should be made available in
Canada at that time.
36 ISED expects this designation will be made permanent in a future spectrum allocation decision, the date of which is presently unknown.
37 ISED, SAB-001-17 – Displacement of Existing Fixed Service Assignments in the Frequency Band 5850-5925 MHz, February 2017, <https://www.
ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf11264.html>.
38 Testing of C-V2X has also been done with cellular providers using cellular bands.
39 ISED, Spectrum Outlook 2018-2022, at 31, online: < https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/vwapj/Outlook-2018-EN.pdf/$file/Outlook-2018-EN.
pdf

China

Regulatory overview
In China, an autonomous vehicle is usually referred to as an “intelligent connected vehicle” or a “driverless vehicle.”
China enacted road safety laws and regulations to cover driverless vehicles, which are applicable nationwide.
Local governments have also enacted their own regulations.
The regulatory agencies/authorities with oversight include the Ministry of Transport, National Development and
Reform Commission, Ministry of Public Security, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, and local traffic
control departments.
On the national level, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, Ministry of Public Security and Ministry
of Transport on April 3, 2018, promulgated the Regulations on the Administration of Road Testing of Autonomous
Vehicles (for Trial Implementation) to advance the transformation, upgrading and innovation of transportation, and
to regulate the administration of road testing of autonomous vehicles.
These regulations are part of a broader effort on the part of the Chinese government to develop the autonomous
driving industry as a part of the country’s overall plan to reorient its economy towards a more high-tech industrial
model that includes autonomous vehicles and related technology.

In 2015, the State Council published a document entitled “Made in China 2025,” in which it detailed not only the
reasoning behind this goal, but also the specific time frame in which they hope to achieve it. In this document, the
State Council names 10 specific industries in which the People’s Republic of China (PRC) wants to take the lead.
Three of them—robotics, new-generation information technology and new-energy vehicles—point toward the
autonomous vehicle industry.
In April 2017, Ministry of Industry

and Information Technology, National
Development and Reform Commission, and
Ministry of Science and Technology issued
“Medium- and Long-term Development
Plan of Automobile Industry,” highlighting
autonomous vehicles as a transformational
breakthrough and an opportunity to upgrade
the domestic automobile industry.
In January 2018, National

Development and Reform
Commission launched
the national innovative
development strategy
of intelligent vehicles.
In April 2018, Ministry of Industry and

Information Technology, Ministry of Public
Security and the Ministry of Transport
In May 2018, Guochun Zhai, promulgated the “Regulations on the
Deputy Director of Ministry Administration of Road Testing of Autonomous
of Industry and Information Vehicles (for Trial Implementation).”
Technology, said that China
has achieved the fundamental In April 2018, Guobin Xin, Vice Minister of Industry and
and strategic advantages to Information Technology, stated that the development
develop autonomous vehicles of autonomous vehicles is not only an important
as the result of development means to solve the problems that the auto society
of the information technology faces such as traffic security, traffic jam, energy
industry to support the auto consumption, pollution emission, but also the core
intelligence and connectivity. element to build “Smart Travel” and serve the new
The aforementioned “Medium- and industrial ecology. Additionally, the development of
Long-term Development Plan of autonomous vehicles is an important carrier to build
Automobile Industry” proposed China into a powerful nation in transport, build digital
that by the end of 2020, the degree China and promote the construction of a “Smart
of intelligence shall be significantly Society.” It has become crucial to the transformation
enhanced, and the part of intelligence and upgrading of the automobile industry in the new
in automobile after-market and service era and the strategic highpoint of global automobile
industry shall account for more than industry technology reform.
45 percent of the value chain. By 2025,
key fields shall achieve full-aspect
intelligence, and the intelligence degree Looking ahead, the National
in automobile after-market and service Development and Reform
industry shall account for more than Commission will enact
55 percent of the value chain. regulations about the
application of assisted driving
function, public road test of
intelligent vehicles, autonomous
driving systems, the division
of liabilities between the
autonomous driving system
and the driver, management of
vehicle insurance, etc.

In regard to the vast amount of data collected by Information and Ministry of Transport had reached a
autonomous vehicles, certain types of consumer data consensus that the government would devote itself
could be deemed “important data” according to the to promoting the research on vehicle networking,
Cybersecurity Law of the People’s Republic of China and speeding up the intelligent and digital revolution
(CSL). Important data refers to the kind of data that, on the highways in China.
if divulged, could directly affect national security,
• Finally, China is preparing the streets themselves for
economic security, social stability and public health and
autonomous transit. For example, on May 24, 2019,
security, such as geography and mineral resources, etc.
Wei Lai Road street office in Zhengzhou, Henan
Important data cannot be transmitted abroad unless
Province, set up a strategic-cooperation relation
reviewed and approved by authorities. Also, there are
with China United Network Communications Group
special requirements for storage and protection of
Co., Ltd., aiming to push forward the construction of
important data.
“Smart Street” in Henan Province.41
However, currently, there are no specific Internet of
things (IoT) statutes in place that govern consumer
data. Depending on how one defines “IoT statute,” the
CSL, which governs consumer data, functions like a IoT
statute in many respects. Spotlight
In sum, the Chinese government has taken several Baidu
steps to prepare the national infrastructure for Among the companies competing in the
autonomous vehicles. On December 25, 2018, the autonomous vehicles space, Baidu is widely regarded
Ministry of Industry and Information Technology issued as one of the biggest players. Its open-source software
development platform, Apollo, was launched in 2017. Not
Action Plan on Car Networking (Autonomous Vehicle)
only has it gathered numerous partners, but it is also leading
Industry Development, proposing cooperation and the race on autonomous vehicle commercialization.
co-construction, and promoting the infrastructure of
One of Baidu’s commercialized products is the Abolong
the car networking industry. The plan proposed several L4 Autonomous Bus, developed in collaboration with King
aspects to improve the national infrastructure, including Long. These small autonomous buses are now operating
improving the construction of the communication commercially in enclosed campuses across 24 Chinese
network, the building and management of the big data cities. The first batch of 100 vehicles rolled off the
production line in July of 2018. As of July 2019, the
and cloud platform and building the intelligent road buses have already served more than 40,000
infrastructure.40 passengers.
• On January 5, 2018, the National Development and

Reform Commission publicly solicited opinions on
“The Innovative Development Strategy of Intelligent
Vehicle” (draft for comments). According to the draft,
the following will be established by 2020: technical
innovation, industrial ecology, road network facilities,
regulatory standards, product supervision and
information security system framework of China’s
standard intelligent vehicles.
• On March 26-29, 2019, Miao Wei, Minister of the

Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, said
at Bo’ao Forum for Asia that Ministry of Industry and
40 http://www.miit.gov.cn/n1146295/n1652858/n1652930/n4509650/c6482536/content.html
41 http://dy.163.com/v2/article/detail/EFTINVRG0514TTJV.html

Driverless vehicle testing c. Vehicle’s state of motion, such as speed and
accelerated speed
and deployment d. Perception of and response to environment
At present, in China, there are applicable regulations e. Real-time status of the vehicle’s lighting and
that permit companies to test driverless vehicles on signaling systems
public roads. “The Regulations on the Administration f. External 360-degree video surveillance of
of Road Testing of Autonomous Vehicles (for Trial the vehicle
Implementation)” permit the road testing of autonomous
vehicles within the territory of the People’s Republic g. In-car video and audio monitoring records that
of China. reflect the status of the test driver and the human-
computer interaction
There are also some applicable municipal regulations
such as “The Regulations on the Administration of Road h. Remote control instructions (if any) received by
Testing and exemplary application of Autonomous the vehicle
Vehicles in Shanghai (for Trial Implementation).” i. Malfunction (if any) of the vehicle.
According to the “Regulations on the Administration 5. The test vehicle shall be used to conduct actual tests
of Road Testing of Autonomous Vehicles (for Trial in certain areas, such as the closed road or venue, in
Implementation),” a test vehicle including passenger compliance with the applicable industry standards of
vehicles and vehicles for commercial uses but excluding the State, testing requirements issued by provincial
low-speed automobiles and motorcycles shall meet the and municipal governments and testing evaluation
following conditions: rules of the testing subject, and fulfill conditions for
1. It has not undergone the registration for road testing:
motor vehicles. 6. The self-driving function of the test vehicle
2. It satisfies all statutory testing requirements, except shall be tested and verified by a third-party
endurance, for the corresponding type of vehicles; if testing institute recognized by the State or
a particular statutory testing requirement is not met local province or municipality to engage in
due to the self-driving function, the testing subject automobile-related business.
has to prove that the safety performance of the
Additionally, according to “The Regulations
vehicle has not been jeopardized.
on the Administration of Road Testing
3. It can be steered manually and automatically and of Autonomous Vehicles (for Trial
could switch between the self-driving mode and Implementation),” appropriate safety
the manual driving mode in a safe, rapid and easy
hardware/software must be established in
manner, accompanied with a warning sound, in
order to ensure the vehicle could be switched
a safety management plan and a test driver
to the manual driving mode immediately under must sit in the cab of the test vehicle from
any circumstance. the beginning to the end.
4. It has functions of recording, saving and monitoring The driver must keep a close eye on the running status
online its status and is able to transfer real-time of the test vehicle and the surrounding environment
information listed in Item 1 through Item 3 and throughout the test, and be ready to take control of
to automatically record and save the following the vehicle at any time. In practice, both L3 and L4
information (for a period of at least 90 seconds prior autonomous driving shall have a driver sitting beside
to the accident or malfunction, which shall be stored the wheel. Where the test driver finds it improper for the
for at least three years): vehicle to run automatically or the system warns of the
need to have manual operations, the driver shall take
a. Control mode of the vehicle
control of the vehicle immediately.
b. Location of the vehicle

A test driver, the driver authorized by a testing subject to a. Be an independent legal person registered within
take charge of the testing process and take emergency the territory of the PRC.
measures against the test vehicle when an emergency
b. Have relevant business capabilities concerning
arises, shall have the following requirements fulfilled:
intelligent connected vehicles, such as the
1. Inked an employment contract or a labor service manufacturing of automobiles and spare parts
contract with the testing subject thereof, research and development of technologies,
or experiments and tests.
2. Obtained the driving license for steering the
corresponding type of vehicles and having been c. Be financially able to make civil compensation for
experienced in driving for more than three years likely damages caused by intelligent connected
vehicles to individuals and property during the test.
3. Have fewer than twelve points under the demerit
point system in any of latest consecutive three d. Have in place the evaluation rules for the test of self-
demerit point periods driving functions of intelligent connected vehicles.
4. Not been involved in any serious traffic violations in e. Be able to conduct real-time remote monitoring of
the latest year, such as driving at a speed 50 percent test vehicles.
higher than the upper limit or running a traffic light
f. Be able to record, analyze and reproduce events
5. Not been involved in driving after drinking alcohol performed with test vehicles.
or drunk-driving or taking psychotropic or narcotic
drugs that are under control of the State
During an ongoing test, the self-driving
mode shall not be adopted, except when
6. Not been involved in any traffic accidents that
the test vehicle is running on the sections
resulted in death or serious personal injuries;
of roads selected for the testing purpose
7. Received self-driving training offered by the testing on the testing notice; the test vehicle shall
subject; familiarized himself or herself with testing
be driven manually from the parking lot to
rules for self-driving; mastered how to make
operations during self-driving tests; and capable of
the section of road selected for the testing
responding to an emergency purpose. Finally, during an ongoing test, a
test vehicle shall not carry any persons or
8. Other conditions specified in laws, regulations
freights irrelevant to the test.
and rules
As it relates to vehicle deployment, there are currently
Prior to running any tests, testing organizations shall file
no regulations permitting consumers to use, or
an application for permission to carry out road tests with
prohibiting consumers from using, driverless vehicles
the competent authority of provincial and municipal
for personal use. However, at present, all of the
governments and should specify where the sections of
autonomous driving is experimental only.
roads selected for the scheduled tests are located. Each
organization must buy the compulsory liability insurance However, even experimentally, autonomous vehicles will
for traffic accidents, worth of at least CNY5 million be available to ordinary taxi passengers. On September
(about US$705,500) or provide, for each vehicle, a letter 16, 2019, Shanghai city issued the first batch of
of guarantee on compensation of equivalent amount for exemplary application licenses of autonomous driving
accidents arising in road tests of self-driving functions. to SAIC Motor, BMW and Didi Chuxing, allowing the
companies to put their licensed autonomous vehicles
According to “The Regulations on the Administration
into daily ordinary uses for normal passengers. For
of Road Testing of Autonomous Vehicles (for Trial
the first batch, each company can have 50 licenses
Implementation),” besides the requirements for the test
maximum, with that amount to increase after six months
driver and the test vehicle, the testing organization shall
of good performance.
also meet the following conditions:

4243
• “Tort Law of the People’s Republic of China” regulates
the motor vehicle traffic accident liability.
Spotlight • “Implementing Regulations on the Law of the
People’s Republic of China on Road Traffic Safety.”
Test driving in Beijing • “The Regulations on the Administration of Road
Testing of Intelligent Connected Vehicles (for Trial
• On October 31, 2018, Ford and Baidu
Implementation)” regulates the handling of traffic
announced the launch of a two-year joint
violations and accidents.
test project on L4 autonomous driving. The
test will be conducted on the designated Current road traffic safety laws are applicable to
roads under “Requirements for Beijing autonomous driving about who or what may be liable
Autonomous Vehicles Test Roads.”42 for accidents involving autonomous vehicles. In the
current road traffic safety law, negligence principles
• By the end of July 8, 2019, Beijing had
apply. As such, it is conceivable that sellers, re-sellers,
opened 44 testing road lines, 123km in total,
manufacturers and/or test drivers could be held liable.
becoming the city possessing the longest
testing roads. 11 enterprises totaling 65 The confusion surrounding liability in these cases may
vehicles have been granted autonomous be replaced by some clarity in the near future. The
vehicle test licenses by Beijing agencies. The National Development and Reform Commission is set
safety test driving distance has exceeded to enact regulations to address the division of liabilities
400,000 km.43 between the autonomous driving system and the driver.
• On July 1, 2019, the Beijing Automotive
Driving Test Management Joint-Committee Data privacy and security
issued Beijing’s first batch of L4 automobile
road-test driving licenses—five in total, all There is not one unified code governing data privacy
obtained by Baidu, making it the first, and in PRC. Instead, there are many laws, regulations and
so far only, company in the country to have department rules.
obtained this license.
1. Article 29 of “The Law of the People’s Republic of
China on the Protection of Rights and Interests of
Consumers” (CSL) stipulates that companies’ seeking
to collect and use personal information must acquire
Liability the consent of the data subjects beforehand, and

that companies shall be held liable for the safety and
In the event of a crash there are several liability regimes integrity of the private data or personal information.
that may come into play including: 2. Article 22 of the CSL has the same requirements.
• “Product Quality Law of the People’s Republic of 3. Article 41 of the CSL forbids the company to use the
China” provides a regulatory system of obligations collected privacy data or personal information for
and warranties in order for manufacturers to meet objects irrelevant to the services provided by the
quality and safety standards. companies.
• “Law of the People’s Republic of China on Road 4. Article 43 provides that the data subjects have
Traffic Safety” regulates the liability of the parties the right of correction and deletion of personal
concerned under the traffic accidents. information.
42 https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/pPvrZeGY9N9FzOr4O1s9Aw
43 http://finance.ifeng.com/c/7o8VbzlNllI

5. Advanced laws and regulations include, but are not correct their personal information if the collected or
limited to: used information is incorrect. Like Australia, there is no
historical equivalent to “right to be forgotten” in China,
a. “Personal Information Protection Law.”
while there are relevant suits.
b. “Data Security Law.”
Cybersecurity in the Internet of things is mainly
c. “Notice of the Cyberspace Administration of China regulated by the CSL, especially classified protection
on Seeking Public Comments on the Measures for of cybersecurity, which takes cybersecurity in the
Security Assessment for Cross-border Transfer of IoT into the supervision requirement. For example,
Personal Information” (draft for comment). recommended national standard regulates the
d. “Notice of the Cyberspace Administration of expanded requirements based on the common
China on Soliciting Public Comments on the requirements of cybersecurity in GBT22239-2019 “Basic
Administrative Measures on Data Security” Requirements for Graded System for Cybersecurity
(exposure draft). Protection of Information Security Technology.”
All aforementioned privacy data and personal Other recommended national standards regulate the
information include collection of information from use IoT. For example:
of autonomous vehicles.
• GB/T 37044-2018: “Information Security
Usually, consumer data would be deemed as personal Technology--Security Reference Model and Generic
information or privacy data in PRC, like vehicle Requirements for Internet of Things.”
information, location information, driving habits
• GB/T 36951-2018: “Information Security Technology-
and so on.
-Security Technical Requirements for Applying
There is no limitation on the types of Perception Terminals in Internet of Things.”
personal information or privacy data one
may collect, store, transmit or use, provided
-Security Technology Requirements of Gateway in
you have obtained the consent of the data Sensing Layer of the Internet of Things.”
subjects to engage in such data process
activities.
-Security Requirements of Data Transmission for
Data generally is only allowed to be stored and Internet of Things.”
transmitted if: • GB/T 37093-2018: “Information Security
1. The process activities are relevant to the gatherer’s Technology—Security Requirements for IoT Sensing
functions and activities. Layer Access to Communication Network.”
2. The process activities do not violate any laws or While the standards do not mention autonomous
administrative regulations and do not breach any driving specifically, the guidance or standards
agreements with the data subject. mentioned above describe best practices regarding
cybersecurity. Some of them were issued by
3. Process activities, including storage and governmental agencies; some are issued by industrial
transmission, have the prior consent of the data associations (which are quasi-governmental agencies in
subject. China).
4. The personal information is secure.
Finally, the Ministry of Industry and Information
In PRC, the data subjects, including consumers, Technology issued “Guidance to the Standard System
have the right to delete the personal information if Construction of National Connected Vehicle Industry
the collection, storage, use and disclosure of such (Autonomous Vehicles),” which calls for an expedited
information violate any laws and administrative process for the construction of autonomous vehicles
regulations or breach the bilateral agreement. Data standard system including both functional security of
subjects also have the right to ask the company to vehicles and key system units and information security.

Telecommunications
and 5G
The Chinese government has made a widespread In November 2019, the first “5G + intelligent agricultural
rollout of 5G a priority. On March 26-29, 2019, Miao machinery” innovation demonstration scene in China
Wei, Minister of the Ministry of Industry and Information was initiated in Shanghai. 5G driverless harvesters
Technology, addressed at Bo’ao Forum for Asia that the automatically planned, turned, advanced and retreated
application of 5G should be divided into “two eight”; and completed the harvest of rice fields one by one
that is, the communication between people takes 20 precisely.
percent and the communication between things takes
In December 2019, the first 5G autonomous driving
80 percent. Among them, one of the biggest markets
traffic management system in the world that integrates
of mobile IoT is vehicle networking, which represents
vehicles, roads, and smart cities officially landed in
the application of 5G technology, especially by
Shanghai and has opened to the public. Zhangjiang
autonomous vehicles.
Hi-Tech Park and Human Horizons jointly demonstrated
As it relates to spectrum, on December 1, 2018, the the future urban travel plan of “zero accident, zero
“Temporary Administrative Regulations on the Direct emission and zero congestion.”
Connected Communication Use of 5905-5925MHz
The initiative is part of a larger Human Horizons
Spectrum on Car Networking (Autonomous Vehicles),”
project called “3 Smart” which focuses on creating
issued by Ministry of Industry and Information
an ecosystem of smart vehicles, roads and traffic
Technology, came into effect. The Chinese government
management systems.
has chosen cellular vehicle-to-everything (V2X)
communication as the primary means for vehicle to
vehicle remote interaction.
In June 2019, Ministry of Industry and Information

Technology formally granted commercial licenses
to China Telecom Group Co. Ltd., China Mobile
Communications Group Co. Ltd., China United
Network Communications Group Co. Ltd., and China
Broadcasting Network Corporation Ltd.

Germany

Regulatory overview With the type approval, the authority confirms that
the serially manufactured approved product meets
A. TRANSPORT AUTHORITIES legal standards. Type approvals stand for safe and
environmentally friendly technology on the roads.
Germany, home to several leading automotive
companies, is a leader in autonomous transportation. • Vehicle type approvals can be granted in accordance
Among the institutions leading the effort to welcome with national regulations (section 20 StVZO) or EC
autonomous vehicles is the Federal Ministry of regulations (Directives 2002/24/EC, 2003/37/EC or
Transport and Digital Infrastructure (BMVI), a 2007/46/EC).
supreme federal authority of Germany. The Ministry, • Component type approvals can be granted in
together with its subordinate authorities, carries out accordance with national regulations (§§ 22 or 22a
departmental tasks in the fields of mobility of persons, StVZO), EU regulations (EC directives and regulations,
goods and data. This responsibility extends to the EU regulations) and UNECE regulations (ECE
federal transport infrastructure (federal trunk roads, regulations).
railway networks, waterways and air traffic routes).
• Type approvals for systems can be granted in
The highest state authorities in the field of transport are accordance with EU regulations (EC directives and
the Ministry of the Interior, Sport and Integration and regulations, EU regulations) and UNECE regulations
the Ministry of Housing, Construction and Transport. In (ECE regulations).
addition, there are several road traffic authorities that
In Germany, the Road Traffic Authority is the
engage the Road Traffic Regulations (StVO), the Holiday
administrative authority, determined by state law in
Travel Ordinance and the Federal Emission Control Act.
accordance with section 44 Road Traffic Regulations
They are the:
(StVO), responsible for monitoring and implementing
• Municipalities belonging to the district (local road the Road Traffic Regulations. The Road Transport
traffic authorities). Authority is not an independent organizational unit,
but is part of the local municipal administration (city
• District authorities and municipalities in their own
administration or, in municipalities with a smaller
right (lower road traffic authorities).
population, the district administration).
• Governments (higher road authorities).
Finally, in Germany, the motor vehicle registration office
• State Ministry of the Interior, for Sport and Integration (and the driving license authority) may be assigned to
(Supreme Road Administration). the office that also assumes the task of the road traffic
By way of background, the Federal Motor Transport authority, but this does not necessarily have to be
Authority (KBA) was established by law on August the case.
4, 1951, as the federal authority for road traffic. It
Each of the aforementioned institutions plays a role in
belongs to the division of the Federal Ministry of
approving and regulating autonomous vehicle testing
Transport and Digital Infrastructure and sees itself as a
and deployment.
service provider for motor vehicles and their users. In
Germany, the KBA is the only type approval authority. Germany is a high-tech country
Type approvals confirm that the legal safety and
with a strong automotive and IT/
environmental standards as they relate to transportation
telecommunications sector. It is also one
are fulfilled. In addition there are other type approvals
required via the European Economic Area (EEA) and of the leading export nations and an
ECE regulations. The KBA informs other contracting important transit country. Modern mobility
states and national official monitoring organizations is a key to prosperity.
(sections 19 and 29 Road Traffic Licensing Regulations
The federal government has set itself the task of
(StVZO)) of type approvals granted.
promoting this prosperity even in the digital age. The
Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure

(BMVI) ensures that key players from industry, research, Agency. “They have to announce by what date how
associations, administration and politics work together. many percent of autonomous cars must have this
This is intended to pave the way for solutions that are technology.” In the same way, safety belts and airbags
viable for society as a whole. have also been made compulsory for all manufacturers.
The coalition agreement for the (current) 19th legislative Germany has a national strategy for AVs and plans
period provides for various measures to create modern, for using them ethically but its federated structure,
barrier-free, sustainable and affordable mobility. In the which can spur innovation in regions, may threaten
new legislative period, the BMVI will therefore continue consistency at the country level.
to advocate for the creation of optimal framework
So far, the main results of the implementation of the
conditions for the introduction of automated and
strategy by the federal government have been:
connected driving systems (ACD) into the regular
operation of road traffic. • Adaptation of the national legal framework, in
particular the amendment of the Road Transport Act.
Since 2013, the BMVI has established the Automated
Driving Round Table (RTAF) as an advisory body. • Adoption of an action plan to establish ethical rules
It facilitates a close exchange among actors from for driving computers.
industry, science, associations and administration.
• Establishment and coordination of test fields for
The necessary know-how is bundled in such a way
automated and connected driving in real traffic.
that a broad social consensus can be reached on all
relevant aspects of ACD. The RTAF meets twice a year • Supporting the research and development of ACD
and has developed the necessary cornerstones for a solutions from basic to applied research.
successful introduction of ACD, which formed the basis
• Active design of regulations and standards in
for the federal government’s “Strategy for automated
committees at European and international level.
and connected driving-remain the lead provider,
become the lead market, initiate regular operation.” Germany has thus achieved an
(ACD strategy). international pioneering role in creating the
For the further development of mobility, the objectives framework conditions for automated and
of the ACD strategy will continue. The strategy was connected driving (ACD), and these must
adopted by the German government in 2015. The be maintained and further expanded.
objectives have been implemented with targeted
measures in the fields of infrastructure, law, promotion
of innovation, connectivity, cybersecurity and data
protection, and social dialogue.
The economy is still sceptical. German politicians

and the German auto industry do not think far
enough ahead. The autonomous car is not only about
driverless mobility, but also about an energy and traffic
revolution. So far, Silicon Valley has understood this
better than Germany— and threatens to move ahead
of Germany in the space. For example, in an effort to
improve the safety of cars driving autonomously, chip
manufacturer Qualcomm is calling for clear political
guidelines for carmakers and suppliers. This involves
the use of technologies so that vehicles from different
manufacturers can communicate with each other.
“The role of the regulatory authorities is central here,”
technology head Matthew Grob told the German Press

On an international level, much has been done and
actively led by Germany, most notably:
2015: A G7 declaration
on automated and
connected driving.
on the development and
comprehensive use of
future-oriented technology.
2016: A declaration of
Amsterdam on self-driving
and connected vehicles.
Spotlight
on cooperation for
modern transport
infrastructure and
advanced technologies Several of Germany’s powerful states are
in transport.
also working on AVs. Some examples are:
• North Rhine Westphalia, which includes

Cologne and Düsseldorf, has established a
Zukunftsnetz Mobilität (future of mobility)
network to support municipalities, many
with the promotion of AVs among its tasks.
2018: A Joint Declaration of • Berlin and Brandenburg (the state
Intent on the Cooperation
in the Area of Automated surrounding the capital) are both analyzing
and Connected Driving
between Germany and the
the market for research and development
People’s Republic of China. work on AVs.
• Public transport providers in Berlin,

Hamburg and Frankfurt, as well as the
national railway company Deutsche Bahn,
are testing autonomous buses in a range of
settings, and there are more than 20 AV test
sites nationwide. Some say that the highly
devolved nature of government—with more
than 11,000 municipalities—makes it difficult
to set national standards and strategy.

B. INTERNATIONAL LAW to the FTÜ may accept the individual provisions, but are
not obligated to do so. Where a contracting party has
In understanding rules for autonomous vehicle
accepted a regulation, it shall be bound by international
deployment a brief overview is required. Road traffic
law, and shall undertake to register vehicles or parts
makes it possible to get from one place to another
approved, in accordance with the regulation in its
quickly and comfortably. In principle, the road network
own country.
is not limited to the national area, but enables cross-
border traffic. Furthermore, vehicles are not only For Germany, this recognition is standardized in
produced in the state in which they will later operate, section 21a Abs. 1 StVZO. In order to make the ECE
rather the automotive industry is characterized by regulations binding at a national level, they must be
imports and exports on a global market. Therefore, it transposed into national law. In the case of countries
is not surprising that international agreements were of the EU, this is regularly done by approving the
concluded with the intention of creating uniform regulation in accordance with the requirements of
traffic and registration rules for motor vehicles in Directive 2007/46/EC, which can be viewed in Annex IV,
order to guarantee the safety of road traffic across Part II, p. 2.
national borders.
The ECE regulations now comprise more than 130
One of these agreements is the “Vienna Convention technical regulations which, in addition to systems and
on Road Traffic” (WÜ) of 08.11.1968, which is an components for active and passive safety, also deal
international treaty obliging the contracting parties to with environmentally relevant regulations. Both the EU
adopt uniform traffic and licensing rules. Compliance and Germany have accepted most of these regulations.
with these provisions is a prerequisite for admission to
international traffic (cf. Art. 3 para. 3 WÜ). These technical regulations have yet to be developed
for autonomous and automated driving beyond
According to Art. 4 para. 2 of Directive 2007/46/EC, assistance systems. However, this does not mean that
member states may only grant approval for vehicles, such modern driving systems cannot be approved.
systems, components or separate technical units if Rather, they are permitted by way of exemptions, also
these comply with the requirements of this directive. for series production, and can then be offered on the
With regard to these approval requirements, Art. 35 market.
(1) Directive 2007/46/EC refers inter alia to the UNECE
C. ROAD TRAFFIC LAW
regulations listed in Annex IV, Part II and declares them
to be equivalent components of secondary community As part of administrative law, traffic law is concerned
law. The abbreviation “ECE” is derived from the United with regulating traffic on public roads in Germany in
Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). such a way that no road user is harmed, endangered,
obstructed or exasperated. It is not summarized in
On the basis of the Vehicle Parts Convention (ECE
a single set of laws, but consists of several laws and
Regulations) (FTÜ), the contracting parties crafted
ordinances, which are passed at the federal level and
ECE regulations for wheeled vehicles, equipment
thus apply throughout Germany.
and parts that can be fitted to wheeled vehicles (cf.
Art. 1 para. 1 p. 1 FTÜ) by means of an administrative The Road Traffic Act (StVG) is overarching: it contains
committee to which all contracting parties belong, in rules on penalties and fines and lays down the basis
accordance with the procedural rules set out in Annex for driving licenses and the registration of vehicles.
1. This includes, for example, brake systems, steering Otherwise, it authorizes the Federal Ministry of
systems or headlights. The contracting parties involved Transport and Digital Infrastructure (BMVI) to implement
are the EU and, in addition to Germany, 46 other states. these general provisions more precisely by means
These ECE regulations, agreed based on the FTÜ, of ordinances.
constitute a set of instruments designed to harmonize
the international technical requirements for motor
vehicles in order to remove barriers to trade in motor
vehicles and their accessories. All contracting parties

The Road Traffic Act (StVO) is probably the most familiar In fact, the latest implemented right to enable levels 3
aspect of traffic law and made up the majority of driving and 4 (except driverless/level 5 vehicles) is already in
lessons for German students. In short, it includes all the force. Sections 1a and b StVG regulates the interaction
traffic rules that must be observed on German roads. between the vehicle with the highly or fully automated
driving function and the driver. The new law provides
In addition to the StVO, The Road Traffic Licensing for the use and concept of highly and fully automated
Regulations (StVZO) define the conditions under which driving functions.
motor vehicles and trailers can be registered for road
traffic. It sets out in detail how these vehicles must be In Germany, vehicles with a highly automated or fully
constructed and how they may be operated. The StVZO automated system may be used in traffic in such a way
is to be gradually replaced by the Vehicle Registration that the driver can hand over the vehicle control to
Ordinance (FZV). Up till now, the FZV has regulated the system in certain situations. The system takes over
exactly how the approval procedure should look, under the longitudinal and lateral guidance of the vehicle
which circumstances license plates are awarded, and as well as acceleration and deceleration for defined
which insurance cover vehicles must have. applications, or for a limited time period. The driver
no longer has to monitor the system permanently.
Finally, the driving license regulation (FeV) prescribes Oftentimes, the system alerts the driver visually and
the conditions an individual must fulfill in order to acoustically when the vehicle needs to be checked
obtain a driving license, and the circumstances under again manually.
which this license may be withdrawn.
The operation of vehicles by means of highly and fully
As it relates to regulations that address autonomous automated driving function systems is only permitted
vehicles specifically, currently for example, there are within the framework of normal use, whereby the
different regulations in the individual US states and also intended purpose depends on the design. If an
in the EU member states; thus also for Germany. automated driving function is only intended for use
At the international level, there are several agreements on motorways, the system must not be used for traffic
that provide the legal framework for national road on other roads. The binding system description of the
transport legislation. One of the most important is the vehicle by the driver manufacturer must provide the
aforementioned Vienna Convention on Road Traffic of driver with unmistakable information on the scope of
1968. Automated systems were unknown in 1968 and the intended use.
therefore not regulated. Regulations at that time were During operation of a highly or fully automated driving
based on a vehicle control by the human driver. Since system, the driver is allowed to turn away from the
the last change in March 2016, automated systems traffic situation. Within the scope of the mandatory
have been allowed. However, fully autonomous (level system description, the driver may take his hands off
5) driving is not yet possible, as the agreement still the steering wheel, look away from the road and carry
provides for a driver. out other activities, such as processing e-mails in
According to section 1a of the Road Traffic Act, there are the infotainment system. The driver no longer has to
no legal restrictions against highly and fully automated monitor the system permanently. However, he must
driving—at least for level 3 (highly automated driving) remain vigilant. The driver is obliged to resume the
and 4 (fully automated driving). However, the experts vehicle control immediately if he recognizes or should
cannot achieve an unequivocal result with regard recognize due to obvious circumstances that the
to the specific obligations, as laid out in section 1b conditions for an intended use of the highly or fully
StVG. This does not apply to fully autonomous driving automated driving functions no longer exist. The driver
(level 5), which is why the legal experts assume that is obliged to continue to be aware in such a way that he
it is “still fundamentally inadmissible.” The absence can at any time fulfill his obligation to resume control
of the possibility that a person in the vehicle could, if of the vehicle immediately. The driver must remain so
necessary, take over the control of the vehicle is not perceptive that he can grasp the situations regulated by
provided for in the text of the law. As such, level 5 law and then resume control of the vehicle.
autonomy is not yet permitted and is inadmissible.

However, the new law does not regulate fully autonomous driving where there are only passengers (i.e., level
5). There is still a legal need for regulatory action at national and international levels, and a possible need for
technological development, as it relates to level 5 autonomy.
Overall, the German federal government welcomes further developments in the field of autonomous driving. Its
aim is to strengthen the German economic position in this sector. In its “Strategy for Automated and Connected
Driving,” which was formulated in 2015, Germany has set the goal of ensuring that Germany remains the “lead
supplier for automated and connected vehicles” and becomes the “lead market.” The introduction of autonomous
vehicles into public road traffic is to be facilitated in particular, by adapting the legal situation.
In 2016, the federal government set up an ethics committee to deal with legal and ethical issues in autonomous
driving. The panel consisted of 14 scientists and experts. In June 2017, the Ethics Committee adopted a final
report with a total of 20 ethical rules. Among other things, it was stated here that the protection of man always has
priority. The Ethics Committee has also rightly made high demands when it comes to data protection. These are
being used today in the development of automated and autonomous systems. In total, three clear principles apply:
transparency, self-determination and data security.
At present, as previously mentioned, high and fully automated driving in the sense of levels 3 and 4 is largely
permissible in Germany.
Angela Merkel
Chancellor of Germany
Insists that we should not lose sight of the social market economy
during digitization. "Prosperity for all—that must also be the melody of
the future in the age of digitalization."
Andreas Scheuer
Federal Minister of Transport
"We are now bringing autonomous driving onto the road as well. At the
moment we are working on a law to allow autonomous shuttles.”
Independent driving, which Scheuer sees as a great opportunity for
road safety, is already being tested. "This will soon enable us to avoid
thousands of accidents and make 'Vision Zero' tangible."
Peter Altmaier
Federal Minister for Economic Affairs and Energy
Pleaded for a merger of European companies in artificial
intelligence—a kind of "Airbus of the AI." A “single European
company—no matter how large it may be—will not be able to compete
alone against the big American players," Altmaier said, adding that the
idea is the most ambitious industrial policy project "that we have
initiated in recent decades."

Driverless vehicle testing There are no special insurance requirements for
autonomous vehicles which go beyond the motor
and deployment vehicle liability insurance prescribed in section 4 PflVG
(Pflichtversicherungsgesetz). However, it might be
As it relates specifically to the testing of autonomous useful for the manufacturer to insure the test vehicle
vehicles in Germany, vehicles may only be operated comprehensively in order to avoid possible liability
on public roads according to section 3 Abs.1 S.1 FZV issues, since the strong connectivity can also lead to
(Fahrzeugzulassungsverordnung) and only if they are new risks (e.g., cyber-attacks).
registered. According to the Vienna Convention (WÜ),
There are a few safety requirements that are important
every vehicle must have a driver (Art. 8 para. 1 WÜ)
to note. As a minimum requirement for functional
who must be able to intervene on request. From a
safety, hardware and software systems must separate
liability perspective, the use of a so-called safety driver
vehicle functions from infotainment, telematics and
in testing vehicles and vehicle systems makes sense
navigation applications. The control systems must
and is common practice. Test drivers must possess a
contain sufficient redundancy. For example, safe
valid driving license otherwise, no additional training is
holding must be ensured even in the event of a failure
necessary, but possible and useful.
of the main control system. Suitable protection against
The approval of prototypes for testing on public roads external (cyber) attacks must be provided, as well as
by means of a special permit is governed by sections 19 against manipulation of security-relevant elements.
ff. of the German Road Traffic Act. StVZO. The granting
At every stage of development, the vehicle must
of permits must be obtained from the responsible
navigate at least as safely as if a human being
Langratsamt and is based on section 20 StVZO for type
controlled it. However, the possibilities of automated
approval and section 21 StVZO for individual approval.
and autonomous driving must not be used to limit the
Until now, up to level 3 is possible for the individual
autonomy of the road user elsewhere. An example
approval of test vehicles.
could be a general speed limit that is “enforced”
The vehicle is tested for their suitability and safety for by the vehicle driving in strict compliance with the
public road traffic within the framework of the approval regulations. Data collection must not be used to
procedure (i.e., it is checked whether the vehicle, establish new restrictions and controls throughout the
its design or its equipment meets the construction country (e.g., for recording driving times). Technological
and operating requirements of section 30 StVZO). development as such will make traffic safer and reduce
With regard to safety, the focus is on whether, based risks such as those posed by overtired drivers.
on general life experience or scientific findings, it is
Finally, in regard to autonomous trucking, while the
sufficiently likely that public road traffic and other road
Hamburg Truck Pilot Project of Hamburger Hafen
users may be endangered.
& Logistik AG and MAN Truck & Bus, for example, is
If the requirements of sections 30-62 StVZO are currently underway to test the automated connection of
fulfilled, the administrative authority grants approval truck columns and fully automated approach on the A7
and the vehicle is registered as a test vehicle. If the motorway and independent loading and unloading in
vehicle does not correspond to the regulations, an container terminals, no more specific legal regulations
exception permission can be given over section 70 have yet been passed for this area of automation.
StVZO by the highest national authority under certain
As it relates to AV deployment, in principle, there are
conditions. The companies may test these on the
no provisions that restrict consumers from riding in
intended test tracks during a possibly limited time-
autonomous vehicles. The operators, however, must
period. In general, all test vehicles must be tested on
observe a few points. Experience with automated
the designated test tracks (e.g., A9 Munich-Nuremberg).
shuttles was gathered in a series of pilot tests over
Permission is also required for testing on the the last few years. The experiments have so far taken
private premises, provided that these are place in “protected areas” both in large cities and in
accessible to everyone. small towns.

All pilot projects must be applied for on a case-by-case Given car manufacturers could be held responsible,
basis. As soon as the automated vehicle (shuttle) is to the car industry would do its best to defend itself
be driven on public roads, it needs, in addition to the against this. In sum, potentially liable are the driver, the
obligatory liability insurance, an “approval on the basis owner, the car manufacturer and the producers of the
of an exemption permit” in accordance with section 70 individual vehicle parts.
of the Road Traffic Licensing Regulations (StVZO).
The insurance industry, which has been dealing
As soon as revenues are generated from the trial with liability issues for robotic cars for months, has a
operation, an operating permit in accordance with the different view. According to insurers, the owner would
Passenger Transport Act is required. have to be liable— even if he did not make a mistake.
This corresponds to the current legal regulation.
Finally, in regard to autonomous taxi like services, an However, the insurance company may seek recourse
operating permit in accordance with the Passenger from the manufacturer if the latter is liable for a failure
Transport Act is required, just as it is for a bus company of the driving system.
or a taxi company.
In the case of semi-autonomous vehicles, the driver
Liability is in any event an integral part of the liability regime.
According to German law, he must be guilty of intent,
A significant question facing automated and negligence, or any other misconduct for liability.
autonomous driving is that of liability in the event of an
As of late discussions have taken place about updating
accident. In Germany and in some other countries, the
the liability regime to cover autonomous vehicles more
legal situation is clear because there is a three-pillar
specifically, however, the previous liability regime of
model consisting of driver, owner and manufacturer
German civil law is regarded as sufficient.
liability. The driver is responsible for the driving task and
must always monitor the vehicle and intervene in the
event of an emergency, for example in the case of semi-
automated driving functions. If he fails to comply with
his duties of care and thereby causes an accident, he
shall be liable, in addition to the owner, for the damage
thereby incurred. Additionally, the manufacturer may be
liable under product and producer liability for damage
caused by a product defect. This combination of driver,
owner and manufacturer liability offers a balanced
distribution of risk, ensures victim protection, and has
proven itself in practice. The liability model is also
a good basis for new systems and the next steps in
automated driving.
Alexander Dobrindt
German politician of the Christian Social Union of Bavaria. Former
Federal Minister of Transport and Digital Infrastructure in the
government of Chancellor Angela Merkel.
When CSU politician Alexander Dobrindt was still Transport Minister, he
had a simple solution to this complex problem: In the event of an
accident with autonomous cars, he said, "the moment the computer
takes over, liability passes to the manufacturer."

Data privacy and security The passing on or even the sale of user and customer
data is not possible without further consideration of the
The data collected by autonomous vehicles (location following scenarios:
data, sensor data, etc.) is considered “personal data”
• Transfer/sale in the context of a complete company
as defined by the EU and Federal Data Protection Act
sale (since the responsible person does not change,
(now BDSG) and as of May 2018, the EU Data Protection
there are no issues here).
Regulation (GDPR). Such data can be traced back
to the owner, driver or passenger, and identified as • Disclosure/sale within the framework of an asset deal
information about personal or actual circumstances of (consent of the affected parties may be necessary,
a person. Most of the data collected by modern cars is further information can be found).
assigned to the vehicle identification number (VIN). • Transfer of data within the scope of order processing
The collection, storage and use of personal data (AV contract is necessary).
is permitted under data protection law if there is a • Passing on data in third countries (e.g., Google
justification for doing so or if the data subject has Analytics, guarantees must be available).
given his effective consent. Limiting requirements
• Transfer/sale for the purpose of address trading (as a
(data economy, scoring in accordance with section 31
rule, new consent necessary, insofar as not done in
BDSG 2018) must be observed for both mass collection
the collection of data).
and automated processing of personal data. Further
restrictions apply to particularly sensitive data (e.g., Excluded from this are already publicly available data.
information on health or ethnic origin, cf. Art. 9 EU-
DSGVO). More than four decades ago, the Federal As is already the case under previous legislation,
Constitutional Court put a stop to the creation of total there is a right to information on the processing
personality profiles (profiling). of personal data. Upon request, companies must
provide information on data processing in a precise,
The DSGVO proposes two major documentation transparent, comprehensible and easily accessible
concepts, which must be presented at all costs, if form in clear and simple language. This includes, for
only to prove legal conformity in the event of possible example, the storage period, the purpose for which the
complaints: data are processed, which categories of personal data
are processed, information on the origin of the data and
• The list of processing activities for customer
possible recipients of the data.
data (formerly: procedure directory). This list
should be the central document in the company. A new feature is the right to a copy of the data. You can
It covers all typical processing steps (e.g., e-mail specifically request information about which personal
marketing, CRM, customer analysis, etc.) but data are processed by the responsible person (e.g.,
also your payroll accounting or merchandise surname, first name, address, date of birth, profession,
management system and the like, and helps you to medical findings) and receive this in the form of a copy
comply with your obligations. provided by the company.
• Documentation of processing security (technical Under certain circumstances, companies must delete
and organizational measures). Customer and user data. This is the case, for example, when the data are
data can be sensitive, which is why the legislature processed unlawfully or are no longer needed for the
stipulates here that they must be well secured. It original purpose for which they were collected.
must document extensively which measures are in
place to ensure that the data is safe in the enterprise Individuals may also request, under certain
and remain there. circumstances, that your data not be further processed.
The data is therefore not deleted, but the data
Before collecting the data, the organization should
processor must block the data and cannot continue to
make sure that all data is necessary and proportionate
use it as usual.
to the purpose for which it was collected.

In an effort to address data security, the Act to Increase
the Security of Information Technology Systems (IT
Telecommunications
Security Act), came into force in July 2015. Through this
Act, the federal government intends to make Germany’s
and 5G
IT systems and digital infrastructures the most secure in The auction of the 5G frequencies in the 3.6 gigahertz
the world. range by the Federal Network Agency began on March
19, 2019. Some 2 GHz frequencies are also earmarked
In addition, The Federal Office for Information Security
for 5G use, but will only be available between 2020
(BSI), which is responsible for security in information
and 2025.
technology in Germany, has numerous references to
the correct protection of data on its homepage. Right from the start, 60 5G antennas have been
transmitting in more than 20 cities and communities.
The IT Security Act requires that operators of critical
At present about 150 cities and communities are
infrastructures in certain areas will have to comply with
connected and by end of the year Germany expects
a minimum standard of IT security and report significant
to operate around 300. These include Cologne,
IT security incidents to the BSI. For the information
Düsseldorf, Hamburg, Dortmund and Munich.
technology and telecommunications sector, which is
also highly relevant for automated and autonomous It is unknown if the government has taken a position
driving, the Ordinance on the Determination of Critical between using 5G networks for cellular vehicle-to-
Infrastructures under the BSI Act (BSI-KritisV) already everything communication or dedicated short-range
defines the scope of application. communication. DSRC technology is already being
used in Germany for the digital truck tolling system.
The transport and traffic sectors also fall within the
From a technical point of view, this communication
scope of the IT Security Act. The first regulation
is desirable, but not necessary for the current sensor
amending the KRITIS Regulation of 21.6.2017 (BGBl. I, p.
acquisition of the data by operating level 3 vehicles.
1903) determines exactly which annexes are included.
Part 3, plant categories and threshold values, point 1.4, Notably, spectrum is unregulated in Germany, unlike in
lists the traffic control and guidance system for the Great Britain or France.
federal motorway network, as well as the traffic control
and guidance system for municipal road traffic for cities
with more than 500,000 inhabitants.
Even if this regulation is not yet directly aimed at (highly)

automated or autonomous driving, it is already clear
that a corresponding IT infrastructure will fall under the
increased requirements of the IT Security Act.

New Zealand

Regulatory overview Notably, neither the LTA nor any of the Land Transport
Rules specifically requires a “driver” to be physically
Before exploring the laws and regulations that apply to present in a vehicle for it to be operated legally.
autonomous vehicles it is important to understand the
However, both the LTA and the Land Transport Rules
government structure of New Zealand and the relevant
impose duties in relation to the operation of all
regulatory agencies. New Zealand has a unicameral
vehicles in a safe manner.46 Not to mention that, at the
national parliament with no state or regional assemblies.
international level, New Zealand has ratified the Geneva
The two government agencies with regulatory oversight
Convention on Road Traffic 1949, which requires every
are the Ministry of Transport and the New Zealand
vehicle to have a “driver” (although does not expressly
Transport Agency (NZTA). Additionally, the New Zealand
require the driver to be physically present within the
Police are responsible for the day-to-day enforcement
vehicle). As a signatory to the Convention, New Zealand
of land transport-related offenses.
is obliged to give effect to the Convention through
New Zealand’s Parliament is responsible for setting domestic legislation.
legislation to regulate land transport matters, including
Overall, the current government is generally supportive
legislation applicable to the regulation of autonomous
of the testing and adoption of autonomous vehicles in
vehicles. That legislation may grant rule-making powers
New Zealand, although it is not highlighted as a specific
to arms of the Executive, such as the Ministry of
priority.
Transport or NZTA.
An information document published by the Ministry of
The primary legislation regulating vehicles and road
Transport in 2016 (under a previous government) states:
transport (including autonomous vehicles) is the Land
Transport Act 1998 (LTA).44 NZTA has been granted The Government encourages the testing
authority under the LTA to develop the Land Transport of semi and fully autonomous vehicles,
Rules,45 which contain more detailed requirements and as well as other transport technologies
processes for carrying out the general objectives and and innovations in New Zealand in
principles of the LTA.
order to facilitate our early adoption of
These include Land Transport Rules to regulate: beneficial technology.
The document notes that New Zealand is a good
• Road user behavior.
location to carry out testing because of its range of
• Driver licensing. road conditions, supportive legislation and the ability to
test on public roads.47
• Vehicle standards and certification.
The previous Government (2008-17) indicated that
Neither the LTA nor any of the Land Transport Rules
it did not intend to engage in legislative reform until
specifically regulate the use of autonomous vehicles.
autonomous vehicles are closer to being commercially
In addition, nothing in either the LTA or any of the Land
available.48 The current government has not said or
Transport Rules expressly prohibits or restricts the use
done anything to suggest that it is departing from
of autonomous vehicles once they are registered and
this position.
licensed. However, broadly speaking, autonomous
vehicles must comply with the requirements of both. Any policy development or regulatory change would
be led by the Minister of Transport (currently the
Honourable Phil Twyford).
44 http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1998/0110/latest/DLM433613.html
45 https://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/rules
46 Land Transport Act 1998, sections 6-8.
47 https://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Our-Work/Images/T-Technology/69bb8d97ac/Testing-Autonomous-Vehicles-in-New-Zealand.pdf
48 https://www.transport.govt.nz/multi-modal/technology/specific-transport-technologies/road-vehicle/autonomous-vehicles/

Phil Twyford
Minister for Transport of New Zealand
Mr Twyford is a member of the New Zealand Labour Party, which leads
the government (as the largest party) in coalition with the New Zealand
First Party, with the support (in the form of confidence and supply) of
the Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand.
March 19, 2018: Mr Twyford announced the establishment of the
Future Technology Leadership Group.
Shane Jones Julie Anne Genter

New Zealand First Party Member Green Party Member of
of Parliament (MP) Parliament (MP)
Associate Minister for Transport Associate Minister for Transport
Driverless vehicle testing and deployment

New Zealand currently has an autonomous vehicle testing process in place. Each applicant is allocated a
customer support manager to guide them through both obtaining the necessary approvals to test vehicles and
the testing itself.49
Testing companies are permitted to test driverless vehicles on public roads provided that those vehicles comply
with the Land Transport Rules (or are exempted from doing so) and the testing company has followed the
approved testing process required by the NZTA. Generally speaking, a vehicle will meet the requirements of the
Land Transport Rules if it has been manufactured to the applicable standards in Europe, Japan, the US or Australia.
Testing companies must ensure that their activities do not impede traffic or reduce the transport network’s
efficiency in any way. The Ministry of Transport expects that before autonomous vehicles are tested on public
roads, the testing company will already have undertaken testing in a private location and resolved any outstanding
performance issues.50
Notably, neither the Land Transport Act nor any of the Land Transport Rules explicitly state that a vehicle must
have a driver in control while it is in operation. If the vehicle is one in which the operator is able to substantially
disengage from the driving task, the vehicle should provide adequate warning, such as visual and audible
49 https://www.nzta.govt.nz/vehicles/vehicle-types/automated-and-autonomous-vehicles/testing-autonomous-vehicles-in-new-zealand/
50 https://www.transport.govt.nz/multi-modal/technology/specific-transport-technologies/road-vehicle/autonomous-vehicles/testing-
autonomous-vehicles-in-nz/

indicators, to allow the operator to re-engage in the the NZTA is satisfied that the risk to safety will not be
driving task before any automated system becomes significantly increased by the granting of the exemption
ineffective.51 and that:
The test driver (where there is one present in the • The requirement has been substantially complied
vehicle) must have the full license required for the with and that further compliance is unnecessary; or
class of vehicle to which the test vehicle belongs, or
• The action taken or provision made in respect of the
an equivalent license from a different jurisdiction. This
matter to which the requirement relates is as effective
rule applies regardless of whether the test driver is
or more effective than actual compliance with the
physically in the vehicle at the time of testing or not.
requirement; or
The driver must be unimpaired while the vehicle is
in operation.52 Overseas driver licenses issued by an • The prescribed requirements are clearly
eligible jurisdiction (generally pursuant to a reciprocal unreasonable or inappropriate in the particular case;
arrangement) will be recognized in New Zealand for a or
period of 12 months, after which time the holder of the • The events have occurred that make the prescribed
license must apply to convert the overseas license into requirements unnecessary or inappropriate in the
a New Zealand license. particular case.
If testing is of a fully automated vehicle (that is, there The government has indicated that exemptions relating
is no driver present in the vehicle), there should be a to autonomous vehicles are likely to fall within the
means to immediately override all automated systems latter two bullet points above. The government has not
and bring the vehicle to a controlled stop. 53 published any information about how many exemptions
have been granted to autonomous vehicles. The
If the vehicle contains automation technologies that
number of exemptions granted in relation to each Rule
were built in at the time of manufacture, the testing
is published in the New Zealand Gazette, the official
company must provide a statement of compliance
newspaper of the government,54 at least every three
from an authorized representative of the vehicle
months. However, the Gazette does not provide any
manufacturer which lists the vehicle standards
further details about those exemptions.
contained in the Land Transport Rules to which the
vehicle was certified when it was manufactured. If the The company wishing to carry out autonomous vehicle
vehicle contains automation technologies that were testing must follow the process set out on the NZTA
added after manufacture, the testing company must website if that testing is to take place on public roads.
satisfy the NZTA that any modifications to the vehicle The Ministry of Transport recommends that the testing
are compliant with the Land Transport Rules. The company submit a safety management plan to the
modifications must also be certified. NZTA during that process that demonstrates how
safety will be ensured during testing and includes the
If the vehicle does not meet the requirements of the
following information:
Land Transport Rules, the testing company must apply
for an exemption from the Land Transport Rules from • A description of the technologies being tested.
the NZTA. Exemptions are governed by section 166
• A description of testing already undertaken and test
of the Land Transport Act and will only be granted if
performance.
54 https://gazette.govt.nz

• The testing plan, testing schedule and testing Autonomous vehicles require roads to be sealed and
methodologies. in good condition with clear and consistent road
markings. Many New Zealand roads, particularly in
• Safety management accountabilities, lines of
residential areas and outside city centers, do not meet
responsibility and fail-safes.
these requirements. If autonomous vehicles are to
• Risk and hazard identification, and planned operate in separate lanes to other traffic, many roads
management actions and treatments. (including large parts of state highways) will need to
• Completed and planned staff safety training be widened.
and drills. Accordingly, a mass rollout would require significant
• Incident registration and exception reporting upgrades of the majority of New Zealand’s roads. New
methodologies. Zealand is not densely populated outside its main
centers, and its geography presents challenging terrain
New Zealand is unusual in that it does not require the
for road builders, which means that these upgrades are
owner or operator of a vehicle used on public roads
unlikely to be economically viable, other than in major
to hold insurance. However, the Ministry of Transport
cities and/or in the context of specific projects.
recommends that any person undertaking testing
should hold “appropriate levels of public liability and Finally, as it relates to deployment, there is no express
professional indemnity insurance to protect against the prohibition on consumers using driverless vehicles for
risks associated with testing.”55 personal use on public roads. However, the vehicle
must meet the requirements of the Land Transport
In sum, there are no vehicle safety rules that restrict
Rules and must be able to legally be driven in New
autonomous vehicles from operating, except to the
Zealand. In practice, this means that only quasi-
extent that an autonomous vehicle is not compliant
automated technology (such as adaptive cruise control)
with one or more of the Land Transport Rules for any
is available for consumer use.
reason and is unable to obtain an exemption from the
particular Land Transport Rules. Moreover, regulations In addition to ensuring that the autonomous vehicles
do not prohibit autonomous trucking/platooning. In and the manner in which they are operated comply with
fact, platooning in the form of adaptive cruise control the Land Transport Rules, an operator of a “passenger
(where a driver retains full control of the vehicle) is service” must comply with the Land Transport Rules
permitted under existing regulations. applicable to the operation of a passenger service (and
must, if applicable, obtain an appropriate license to
Going forward, significant infrastructure investment is
operate such a service).
required to prepare roads for fully automated vehicles.
Liability
At this stage the government of New Zealand hasn’t
taken any concrete steps to prepare the national
infrastructure for autonomous vehicles. The KPMG
In the event of a crash involving an autonomous
Autonomous Vehicles Readiness Index Report has
vehicle, usual negligence principles will apply, except
identified improvements to infrastructure as a key way
in relation to personal injury which is covered by the
in which New Zealand can become more ready for
Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC).
autonomous vehicle testing and use.56
What is clear is that New Zealand infrastructure, and

Liability will depend in particular on a plaintiff’s ability
particularly its roading, is not prepared for a mass
to prove the existence of a duty of care, and to meet
rollout of autonomous vehicles.
the remoteness and causation requirements of the tort.
The less direct the prospective defendant’s involvement
56 https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/nz/pdf/February/Autonomous_Vehicles_Report_2018.pdf

in the accident, the more difficult this will be. This Work Act 2015 (HSWA).58 Under the HSWA, persons
issue will become more complex as vehicle autonomy conducting a business or undertaking (known as
increases. This issue is not unique to New Zealand PCBUs) can be held liable for any accidents involving
and it is likely that New Zealand case law will follow a workers (or other people) in the place where an
similar approach to the law of negligence developed autonomous vehicle was being tested or used if they
in other common law jurisdictions (in particular the have failed to take all reasonably practicable steps
UK and Australia). to minimize or eliminate the risks associated with
the autonomous vehicle. The definition of “worker”
It is also important to know that certain rules and contained in the HSWA is broad and applies to
regulations apply to autonomous vehicles as defined by employees, independent contractors, labour hire
criminal offenses under the Land Transport Act. workers, volunteers, and various other classes of
The circumstances of a crash may give rise to a breach person.
of sections 6 to 8 of the LTA. Breaches of these sections The maximum penalties available under the HSWA
is an offense that may result in criminal liability and differ depending on the person or company being
convictions. The punishments will depend on the prosecuted, but can be up to NZD3 million or five years’
offense and the consequences (that is, whether the imprisonment for directors or officers of a PCBU.
crash resulted in any injury or death). The maximum
punishments are: Liability for personal injury: Personal injury caused
by accidents, including vehicular accidents, is covered
• Fines of up to NZD20,000. by the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC).59
• Up to ten years’ imprisonment. ACC is a no-fault government scheme which heavily
subsidizes medical and rehabilitation costs arising from
• Disqualification from holding or obtaining a driver
injuries sustained in accidents. It applies in respect to
license (in some cases the minimum disqualification
accidents involving any person present in New Zealand
period is specified in the LTA, while in others it is at
(including visitors).
the court’s discretion).57
All other offenses, including those relating to driving If an injury is covered by ACC, section 317 of the
under the influence of alcohol or drugs, are listed in Accident Compensation Act 2001 creates a statutory
Parts 5 and 6 of the LTA. bar to issuing proceedings in the New Zealand courts
for damages in respect of the injury. However:
While no one has been convicted to date of an offense
in relation to autonomous vehicles, laws will likely apply • The injured person may still issue proceedings for
in much the same way as they would to traditional exemplary damages, which are intended to punish
(completely driver-controlled) vehicles. It is particularly the defendant rather than to compensate the injured
important to note that the offenses do not require the person.
person to be “driving” the vehicle in order to be liable; • The statutory bar does not extend to damage to
they need only “operate” the vehicle or “cause” the property.
vehicle to be driven. To “operate” a vehicle means “to
• If an injury is not covered by ACC, the injured person
drive or use the vehicle on a road, or to cause or permit
may issue proceedings for damages in respect of the
the vehicle to be on a road or to be driven on a road,
injury as if the ACC scheme did not exist.
whether or not the person is present with the vehicle.”
Health and Safety at Work Act 2015: Workplace

health and safety is overseen by WorkSafe New Liability for property damage or other financial
Zealand, which administers the Health and Safety at loss: ACC only applies to liability arising in connection
57 Land Transport Act 1998, sections 34-39.

58 https://worksafe.govt.nz/managing-health-and-safety/getting-started/health-and-safety-at-work-quick-reference-guide/
59 https://www.acc.co.nz/

with personal injury (including loss of income), and
does not cover liability for property damage or other
financial loss. A person who suffers such loss as the The primary legislation governing data privacy in
result of the operation of an autonomous vehicle New Zealand is the Privacy Act 1993, which sets out
may sue to recover damages. Depending on the information privacy principles (IPPs) relating to the
circumstances and the parties involved, most claims collection, storage and use of personal information.
are likely to be for either negligence or breach of The obligations apply broadly to any person or entity
contract. defined as an “agency.”
Conduct in trade: As the commercial availability of “Personal information” means information about an
autonomous vehicles increases, accidents arising from identifiable individual. Even if the information does
defects in the vehicle itself could be covered by the Fair not include details of the individual’s name, the
Trading Act 1986, which prohibits businesses in trade individual may still be identifiable from that information
from engaging in “misleading or deceptive conduct.” and, accordingly, such information will be personal
Liability under the Fair Trading Act could arise where, information for the purposes of the Privacy Act.
for example, the seller of an autonomous vehicle has
made inaccurate representations about its safety, or In New Zealand, information is categorized as “personal
failed to disclose known defects in the vehicle, which information” as soon as the information contains an
result in an accident. Breaches of the Fair Trading Act identifier about an individual, even if the identifier
are investigated and prosecuted by the Commerce cannot be used to identify a specific individual. In other
Commission, the consumer and competition law words, an individual does not have to be able to be
watchdog in New Zealand.60 identified from the information for the information to
be deemed “personal information.” It is sufficient that
Defects in a vehicle may mean that the vehicle is not of an individual can be identified by a link, whether that
acceptable quality under the Consumer Guarantees Act link comes from that entity’s knowledge obtained from
1993, which entitles the consumer/owner (but not any other sources or by other means (such as context,
third parties) to redress from the seller or manufacturer. identification numbers and so on).
In sum, manufacturers and technology providers could, The IPPs relate to the:
in theory, be subject to liability concerns in particular
to causation and remoteness issues. Additionally, • Collection of personal information.
responsibility for property damage or other financial • Storage and security, and retention, of personal
loss may be able to be attributed to the test driver if information.
their actions or omissions caused the accident.
• Rights of an individual in relation to their personal
Going forward, the Ministry of Transport and the NZTA information, including rights of access and
indicated in 2016 that they intended to undertake a correction.
review of transport legislation, which would—among
• Circumstances in which personal information may be
other things—address liability in relation to testing
used and disclosed.
of autonomous vehicles, but not liability in relation
to general use. However, they do not anticipate • Use of unique identifiers.
initiating that review until the commercial availability of
If any agency breaches the IPPs, then the affected
autonomous vehicles has increased substantially.
person may complain to the Privacy Commissioner,
who will try to facilitate a settlement between the
parties. If this fails, then the matter can go to the
Human Rights Review Tribunal, which can require
60 https://comcom.govt.nz/

remedial action and award damages of up to $350,000.
New Zealand’s privacy law is currently being updated, The information must usually be collected directly from
with a new regime proposed by the Privacy Bill being the individual. The collection must not be collected by
expected to come into force in 2020. This will bring unlawful means or by means that are unfair or intrude
New Zealand’s privacy law a step closer towards unreasonably upon the personal affairs of the individual.
reflecting the vast changes in technology that have
Certain exceptions apply to the collection and use of
occurred during recent decades and to better align
personal information, including where collection, use or
New Zealand law with developments in international
disclosure is necessary for the maintenance of law by a
privacy and data protection regulation, including the
public agency, or where the information is anonymized
EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
or is for statistical and research purposes and will not
To the extent that the technology involved in driving be published in a form that could identify the individual.
autonomous vehicles relies on the collection and use
The information must be protected by such security
of personal information, such collection and use will be
safeguards as it is reasonable in the circumstances
governed by the Privacy Act. Examples of information
to take against loss, unauthorized access, use,
collected in the context of the use of an autonomous
modification or disclosure, and other misuse. The
vehicle that might constitute “personal information”
agency must not store the personal information for
under New Zealand law include:
longer than is required for the purposes for which the
Owner and passenger information: Autonomous information may be lawfully used.
vehicles may collect identifying information about the
Save for in certain limited circumstances prescribed by
owner or passenger of the vehicle for purposes such
the Privacy Act, the information must not be disclosed
as to authenticate authorized use, or to customise
to a third party unless such disclosure is authorized by
comfort, safety or entertainment settings.
the individual or the disclosure is one of the purposes
Location tracking: Location data collected and used for which the information was obtained (or is directly
in autonomous vehicles for navigation purposes (e.g., related to the purposes in connection with which the
information about the destination, route, speed and information was obtained).
time travelled that relate to the individual) and for real-
Individuals can request confirmation as to whether an
time traffic data and routing preference may constitute
agency holds personal information about the individual,
personal information to the extent that data is about an
and access to that information. Individuals can request
identifiable individual.
correction of the information held by an agency. There
Sensor data: Sensors (including cameras, voice is no explicit right for an individual to request deletion
recognition and control systems and other devices) of personal information.
may collect identifying data about the vehicle’s
There is no specific regulatory regime
operation and its surroundings that may constitute
governing cybersecurity in the Internet of things
personal information.
(IoT) in New Zealand.
Consumer data (personal information) can be collected
But, the government did release its latest New Zealand
by an agency for a lawful purpose connected with a
Cyber Security Strategy in July 2019.61 The Government
function or activity of the agency, where the collection
established CERT NZ (a national computer emergency
of the information is necessary for that purpose.
response team) to support businesses, organizations
The information must not be used for any other
and individuals who are affected (or may be affected) by
purpose unless authorized by the individual, with
cybersecurity incidents. CERT NZ is a key component
certain other exceptions.
61 https://dpmc.govt.nz/publications/new-zealands-cyber-security-strategy-2019

of New Zealand’s Cyber Security Strategy. CERT NZ
has issued guides on cybersecurity for individuals,62
businesses63 and IT specialists,64 as well as critical
controls and advisories for IT specialists.65
Finally, the Crimes Act 1961 establishes certain criminal

offences involving “computers.” These include the
crimes of accessing a computer system for dishonest
purpose; damaging or interfering with a computer
system; making, selling or distributing or possessing
software for committing crime; and accessing a
computer system without authorization. Spotlight
HMI Technologies LTD.
Telecommunications In June 2019, HMI Technologies Ltd. (and its

subsidiary Ohmio Automotion Ltd.) began testing a
and 5G driverless shuttle at Christchurch Airport. The shuttle
is designed to transport passengers and their luggage
While the government is not directly investing in 5G, from the carpark to the airport terminal, and around
the airport itself. The testing appears to be ongoing, and
private telecommunications companies Spark and Christchurch Airport has since purchased a 15-person Ohmio
Vodafone are currently preparing to launch 5G in New Lift shuttle. The KPMG Autonomous Vehicles Readiness Index
Zealand. The government has allocated a 3.5Ghz band Report records this as “the world’s first fully AV trial at an
for use by the 5G network from November 2020. international airport.”66
Ohmio also partnered with Spark New Zealand to test

Additionally, the government does regulate spectrum. New Zealand’s first 5G-connected driverless car in
Currently, road transport and traffic telematics use a Auckland in March 2019.67
band between 5725 and 5875. New Zealand has not
yet allocated a band to be used for Intelligent Transport
Systems (ITS) but the government has indicated that
its preferred option is to use the 5.9Hhz band and that,
where feasible, New Zealand standards will align with
66 67
joint EU/US standards. It is intended that the 5.9Hhz
band will accommodate ITS generally. New Zealand
does not have a specific position on DSRC vs. C-V2X at
this stage.
62 https://www.cert.govt.nz/individuals/guides/
63 https://www.cert.govt.nz/business/guides/
64 https://www.cert.govt.nz/it-specialists/guides/
65 https://www.cert.govt.nz/it-specialists/
66 https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/nz/pdf/February/Autonomous_Vehicles_Report_2018.pdf
67 http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1903/S00315/new-zealands-first-5g-connected-driverless-car-tested.htm

United Kingdom

Regulatory overview
The UK government recognizes the significant benefits that driverless and automated vehicles could bring and is
working towards the widespread adoption of autonomous cars on the roads by 2021.68 To this end the government
has worked on a number of initiatives to support the development of autonomous vehicles, namely:
69 70 71 72 73 74
As part of the 2013 National Infrastructure
Plan, the government pledged a review of
the legislative and regulatory framework The government believes that connected and
to enable the trialing of driverless vehicles
on UK roads to ensure UK industry and the automated vehicles (CAVs) can change the way
wider public benefit from the development
of driverless cars. These plans were also people travel, making transport safer, smoother
announced in the 2013 Autumn Statement.1
and more accessible to those with mobility issues.
On July 30, 2014, the government By working closely with industry, academia and
launched a “driverless cars” competition
(with a prize fund of £10m) inviting UK regulators, the government aims to make the UK a
towns and cities 2 to join together with
businesses and research organizations premier development location for connected and
to host vehicle trials locally.
automated vehicles.
Going forward, steps need to be taken to redesign

current road networks to enable them to support
Following the conclusion
a mass rollout, for example, mobile parking and
of a review of regulation charging stations, all need to be in place before a
regarding automated vehicle
Following this, in July 2015 the technology in February mass rollout (and the government has already been
2015, the Department for
DfT published “The Pathway
to Driverless Cars: A Code of Transport (DfT) published taking some steps to address these gaps).
Practice for testing,”4 designed “The Pathway to Driverless
to provide non-statutory Cars: A detailed review of
regulations for automated
Some towns and cities that won the government
guidelines for manufacturers
and trialing organizations vehicle technologies.” 3 grant to see trialing of autonomous vehicles
when testing on public roads.
However, this was later replaced locally (such as Milton Keynes), have already
by the “Code of Practice:
Automated vehicle trialing.” 5
This was also followed in the began to take steps to prepare city streets. One
same year (2015) with the
establishment of the Centre for of the initial areas of focus has been seeking the
Connected and Autonomous
Vehicles (CCAV) (by the DfT and best ways of developing effective parking/drop
the Department for Business,
Energy & Industrial Strategy)
off zones and charging points for CAVs (charging
to work across government point infrastructure is also supported through the
to support the market for
connected and automated AEVA 2018).
vehicles (CAVs).
In terms of regulations, in the United Kingdom, the

In August 2017 the CCA
introduced “The key
Department for Transport (DfT) has authority over
principles of vehicle cyber driverless vehicle testing and deployment.
security for connected and
automated vehicles,” 6 a set of
non-statutory principles for
use throughout the sector.
In 2018 the Automated

and Electronic Vehicles
Act was enacted.
68 https://edition.cnn.com/2019/02/06/uk/driverless-cars-scli-gbr-intl/index.html
69 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/autumn-statement-2013-documents
70 Various trials are already under way in parts of the UK, which includes Bristol, Coventry, London, Greenwich and Milton Keynes
71 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/driverless-cars-in-the-uk-a-regulatory-review
72 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/automated-vehicle-technologies-testing-code-of-practice
73 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/trialling-automated-vehicle-technologies-in-public
74 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/principles-of-cyber-security-for-connected-and-automated-vehicles/the-key-principles-of-
vehicle-cyber-security-for-connected-and-automated-vehicles

Several leaders have made autonomous to the use of prototype vehicles on public roads. This
transportation a priority including George regulation states the following:
Freeman, Minister of State overseeing No person shall drive or cause or permit

the CCAV, and Grant Shapps, Secretary any other person to drive, a motor vehicle
of State for Transport. A new test faculty on a road if he is in such a position that
for self-driving vehicles was opened by he cannot have proper control of the
Freeman in September 2019. vehicle or have a full view of the road and
In 2018 the government passed the Automated and traffic ahead.
Electronic Vehicles Act 2018 (AEVA 2018) which
seeks to align insurance law to the developments of In addition to the Construction and Use Regulations,
‘intelligence’ led vehicles, and to provide a framework the Road Traffic Act 1998 and the Highway Code have
that permits the growth of electric vehicles or ultra- relevant provisions governing the safe use of UK roads.
low emission vehicles. In addition there is a Code Note: The Construction and Use Regulations do not
of Practice75 (first issued in July 2015 and updated apply to the testing of autonomous vehicles in locations
in February 2019) which should be used by trialing other than public roads.
organizations in addition to complying with all relevant
UK law. In addition to this specific legislation and For autonomous vehicle trials on public roads, a suitably
Code of Practice, this is a converged area with many licensed and trained safety driver or safety operator
other applicable laws depending on the use case, should supervise the vehicle at all times, ensuring the
for example, existing road safety legislation and data vehicle is observing traffic laws, and should be ready
protection laws. and able to override automated operation if required.
The safety driver may be outside the vehicle as long
The United Kingdom currently anticipates leaving the as he or she has the ability to intervene and resume
European Union in 2020. As such, there is uncertainty manual control if necessary.78
as to the future approach to EU law that currently
applies directly to the UK. Trialing organizations will also need to ensure that:
Driverless vehicle testing

• The vehicle is roadworthy;
• Appropriate insurance is in place;

and deployment • A suitably licensed and trained test driver or test
When conducting vehicle tests, trialing organizations operator is on hand to supervise the vehicle at all
should consider several factors. First, regulation 10476 times and is ready and able to over-ride automated
(or regulation 12077 in regulations for Northern Ireland) operation if necessary;79
of the Construction and Use Regulations which • The organization is in compliance with data
for Great Britain are detailed in the Road Vehicles protection regulations, including requirements that
(Construction and Use) Regulation 1986 and for the personal data is used fairly and lawfully, kept
Northern Ireland the Motor Vehicles (Construction and secure and for no longer than necessary;80
Use) Regulations (Northern Ireland 1999) is applicable
• Applicable local council rules for testing are followed
75 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/776511/code-of-practice-automated-
vehicle-trialling.pdf
76 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1986/1078/regulation/104/made
77 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A42010X0930%2804%29
78 The pathway to driverless cars: a detailed review of regulations for automated vehicle technologies https://www.gov.uk/government/
publications/driverless-cars-in-the-uk-a-regulatory-review
79 Details of licensing are in section 4.7 – 4.14 of The Pathway to Driverless Cars: A Code of Practice for testing
80 https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/. See also the section on Data Protection below.

(e.g., Transport for London, the local government judgement and ability to perform their role from being
body responsible for the transport system in Greater impaired, avoiding anything that prohibits a driver
London, requires that trialing organizations be open from viewing a display screen when driving, remaining
and transparent with the public to promote public conscious of appearance to other road users and
understanding (see the Connected And Autonomous preventing distraction to other drivers i.e. considering
Vehicles: guidance for London trials)). the potential negative impact on other road users
seeing a vehicle being remotely operated.81
General vehicle requirements: In accordance with
the Department for Transport’s (DfT’s) Code of Practice Insurance requirements: Under UK law,82 the use
the vehicle must be roadworthy and must, if used on of non-autonomous motor vehicles must be insured
a public road, meet the relevant national in-service (with the insurance attaching to an individual) so
requirements as detailed in the Construction and Use as to cover third-party risks. Failure to do so is an
Regulations. offense. The Automated Electric Vehicles Acts (AEVA)
2018 introduced a statutory insurance regime for
Remote-control operated: According to the Code
autonomous vehicles which provides that, where an
of Practice, remote-controlled trials should have
accident is caused by an insured autonomous vehicle,
appropriate redundancies in place to handle any failures
the insurer is liable for damage suffered by a person
or disengagements, including warning systems and the
(covering death, personal injury and property, with
ability to allow the safety operator to take control of the
limited exceptions83). Where there is no insurance in
vehicle at all times. Those looking to undertake remote-
place, the owner of the vehicle is liable for the damage.
controlled trials of an automated vehicle on public
roads or other public place will need to ensure that the The AEVA 2018 prohibits exclusions and limitations from
remote-control system is able to deliver the same level the policy, except where the accident is caused directly
of safety as having a driver inside of the vehicle (as per by software alterations made by or with the knowledge
the Code of Practice). of the insured person or where the insured person
failed to install safety-critical software updates they
Companies do not have to obtain a special license
ought reasonably to have been aware of. The insurer is
or permission from a government agency. However,
entitled under the AEVA 2018 to recover amounts it has
trialing organizations must inform the Centre for
paid out as a result from that person.84
Connected and Autonomous Vehicles (CCAV) and the
local council (see section 3 of the Code of Practice). Autonomous truck platooning: Autonomous truck
platooning is permitted in the UK and trials are under
Note that for some future trials on public roads, the DfT
way. Organizations wishing to trial automated vehicles
and emergency services may need to be informed. The
for freight services must comply with the current
updated Code of Practice for Testing indicates that the
regulatory regimes and are encouraged to engage
DfT’s motoring agencies will introduce and operate a
with the DfT and CCAV early on in the process so that
process to support advanced trials on public roads. As
they can get the necessary assistance.85 In addition
of now, the advice given is that those planning trials on
the “Code of Practice: Automated Vehicle Trialing” also
public roads should contact CCAV as far in advance
applies to heavy duty vehicles.86
as possible.
Behavioral safety requirements: Additional

behavioral safety requirements include restricting use
of alcohol and drugs to help prevent driver or operator
81 Section 4.19 – 4.22 of the Code of Practice: Automated Vehicle Trialling. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/trialling-automated-
vehicle-technologies-in-public
82 Road Traffic Act 1998 - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/contents
83 AEVA Section 2
84 See the section on liability below.
85 See sections 3 – 6 in the Heavy vehicle platoons on UK roads feasibility study
86 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/trialling-automated-vehicle-technologies-in-public
NAVIGATING NATIONAL AND LOCAL LAW it may recoup the money from “any other person liable
to the injured party in respect of the accident.” This
Going forward, the UK must address the fact that the
allows recovery from not only an OEM, but also a seller
legal requirements regarding roads are not governed
and/or re-seller and an operator or test driver. If the
by any one government entity. As such, requests to run
accident is caused by a vehicle defect, the recovery
trials require market entrants to navigate regulations at
of damages will be under product liability against the
national and local levels and to negotiate with different
vehicle manufacturer.
entities (e.g. Highways England and an individual local

council). Additionally, it is important that regulations
address potential deficiencies in applicable UK driving
laws and regulations (for example, current UK laws are THE GENERAL DATA PROTECTION REGULATION AND
centered around a driver owing a duty of care to other DATA PROTECTION ACT 2018
road users).87
The EU General Data Protection Regulation91 (“GDPR”)
While the UK is currently trialing driverless vehicles, is the principal privacy legislation applicable in the
consumers have not been permitted to use driverless UK. The Data Protection Act 2018 (“DPA 2018”) is UK
vehicles for personal use. However, development of legislation which supplements the GDPR for specific
a service for the movement of passengers or freight matters (for example in respect to processing of
is possible. Organizations seeking to trial the use personal data for law enforcement purposes). This
of automated vehicles technologies for passenger data privacy legislation may be subject to further
or freight services must comply with the current developments when the UK leaves the EU (however,
regulatory regimes. Those looking to run such services if a withdrawal agreement is ratified by the UK prior
are encouraged to engage with the CCAV at the to the end of January 2020 then GDPR will continue
earliest opportunity.88 to have effect until at least the end of the transition
period specified in the withdrawal agreement (currently
Liability proposed to be December 31, 2020)). Failure to comply
with GDPR can lead to a variety of sanctions, including,
During testing, if the vehicle is in manual mode, the test in certain circumstances, fines of up to 4 percent of
driver would be as potentially culpable for a collision as worldwide annual revenue.
would the driver of a non-autonomous vehicle. But even
if the vehicle is in an automatic mode, it is anticipated Selected privacy considerations are set out below:
that the test driver’s exposure will remain the same
Is the data “personal data?”92
because he or she ought to be continually monitoring
the vehicle and able to assume active control of its The amount of data collected and processed by
movement and direction at any moment.89 connected autonomous vehicles is vast and potentially
has huge value for automotive companies, mobile
The AEVA 2018 provides that payment is to be made
operators, insurers and content providers. The specific
by the insurer regardless of fault.90 When the true
categories of data will depend on the functionality of
fault is later established, the insurer can recover from
the CAV and level of automation – it will be generated
the responsible party, e.g., an original equipment
by in-built systems and applications, as well as the vast
manufacturer (OEM). Under section 5(1), once the
array of remote platforms which provide connectivity,
insurer or vehicle owner has settled the victim’s claim
87 https://www.lawcom.gov.uk/law-commissions-analysis-of-responses-to-automated-vehicle-consultation-points-to-the-way-forward/
88 Section 2.10 of the Code of Practice: Automated Vehicle Trialling. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/trialling-automated-vehicle-
technologies-in-public
89 The Code of practice: automated vehicle trialling. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/trialling-automated-vehicle-technologies-in-
public
90 Section 2 AEVA
91 Regulation (EU) 2016/679
92 Article 4, GDPR

navigation and integration to the vehicle. Some of this in the CAV ecosystem, depending on how the data
will relate to the performance and status of the CAV, is generated and where it is stored, and so, again,
while some will relate to a driver’s driving habits, music a careful legal assessment will also be required in
choices and other personal preferences. this area.
A key “gateway question” therefore is the extent to Design considerations: GDPR imposes enhanced
which CAV data is “personal data” for GDPR purposes. accountability standards in relation to the processing
This will require a careful assessment of the extent to of personal data. In the context of CAVs an important
which a particular category relates to a living individual, principle is the need for proactive consideration
a question that has been subject of much academic of privacy risks when designing new products and
debate. Some categories are clearly personal data – functionality.95 For OEMs, this “privacy by design”
for example driving habits, entertainment preferences process should be embedded in their CAV design
and driver location. However what about machine- roadmaps and key privacy stakeholders – for example
to-machine data relating to the status of a particular any Data Protection Officer – should be part of the
component? This can be a complex assessment. A oversight team.
case-by-case legal assessment will be required.
Storage considerations: As CAV data will be an
Exploitation of data important business asset an organization should
ensure that it has comprehensive and robust data
A further important step is to identify the various retention and data handling policies in place – within
businesses who wish to collect or exploit any personal its own business as well as its data supply chain. A core
data generated by CAVs. Each of these entities may be principle of GDPR is to ensure that personal data is not
data controllers in their own right for GDPR purposes retained for longer than is necessary for the purposes
and, accordingly, will need to consider the extent that it was collected.96 Careful assessment of retention
to which: (1) it has brought its proposed use of any periods for each category of retained data is necessary
personal data to the attention of the driver and any as well as a consideration as to the extent data can be
other data subject (through privacy notices, policies, aggregated or anonymized.
in-car rubric or otherwise)93; and (2) the relevant GDPR
lawful basis on which it will rely to process the data94 International transfers: Given the complexity of
(GDPR-compliant consent can be difficult to achieve the CAV data ecosystem, it is likely that personal data
in the context of CAVs and so other lawful bases, such may be transmitted from the UK to other locations.
as “legitimate interests” or “performance of a contract” Should the UK ratify the EU withdrawal agreement
may also need to be considered). The assessment by January 31, 2020 there can be continued flows of
of these considerations is beyond the scope of this personal data from EU 27 to/from the UK. For transfers
note and will require careful legal analysis to ensure from the UK additional legal measures may need to
compliance. be implemented, depending on the destination of
the data:
In addition to a privacy assessment, a business will also
need to consider whether any other relevant “rights” • Transfers to an “adequate country”97 (Article 45)
exist in the data asset. These might arise automatically (e.g. Argentina, Guernsey, Israel, etc.) can freely
(for example as rights in confidential information, or occur. For transfers to the US, organizations should
potentially other intellectual property rights) or be set also consider relying on the US Privacy Shield
out in contract (for example restrictions on data use). arrangement Privacy Shield.
Some of these rights may vest in a different party
• If there is no adequacy decision for a particular
93 Articles 13 and 14, GDPR

94 Article 6, GDPR. Other lawful bases apply if special category data is processed – see Article 9, GDPR
95 Article 25, GDPR
96 Article 5(1), GDPR
97 https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/international-transfers/

country then the next step is to consider putting analytics tools) should be mindful of the need to carry
in place “appropriate safeguards”(Article 46). The out a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA).101 To
most common form are EU-approved standard assess the level of risk, organizations must consider
contractual clauses. both the likelihood and the severity of any impact
on individuals. High risk can constitute either a high
• If “appropriate safeguards” are not in place then the
probability of some harm or a lower possibility of
transfer can only proceed if an exception applies
serious harm. It is considered to be good practice to
(Article 49), however these “derogations” are narrow
carry out a DPIA for any major projects that require the
in scope and are unlikely to be available for most
processing of personal data.
business as usual (BAU) data flows.
User rights: Organizations should be aware that data A DPIA must:

subjects have a variety of rights under GDPR in respect
• Describe the nature, scope, context and purposes of
to their personal data.98 These rights include:
the processing;
• The right to be informed; • Assess necessity, proportionality and
• The right of access; compliance measures;
• The right to rectification; • Identify and assess risks to individuals; and
• The right to erasure; • Identify any additional measures to

mitigate those risks.
• The right to restrict processing;
e-Privacy Regulation
• The right to data portability;
The draft e-Privacy Regulation is intended to replace
• The right to object;
the current Privacy and Electronic Communications
• Rights in relation to automated decision making Directive (2002/58/EC) (e-Privacy Directive). This draft
and profiling. regulation currently includes rules on cookies, over-the-
top services and machine-to-machine communications
Data security: Information security is at the heart of
as well as extra-territorial scope. Accordingly
GDPR. The legislation is principle-led, meaning that it is
organizations in the CAV ecosystem should also keep
for the relevant data controller to assure itself that it has
these legal developments under review.
appropriate technical and organizational measures in
place to ensure security that is appropriate to the risk.
The GDPR does not mandate although it references
the need to consider security techniques such as
encryption and pseudonymization.99
In addition, the UK government has compiled the

key principles regarding vehicle cyber security for
connected and automated vehicles.100 These principles
are intended for use across the automotive sector and
will be pertinent for automated vehicle businesses.
Organizations that propose to collect sensitive
categories of data or apply higher risk or potentially
intrusive technologies to CAV data (such as data
98 Data subject rights under GDPR 2018: https://gdpr-info.eu/chapter-3/

99 Article 32, GDPR
100 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/principles-of-cyber-security-for-connected-and-automated-vehicles/the-key-principles-of-
vehicle-cyber-security-for-connected-and-automated-vehicles
101 Article 35, GDPR

Telecommunications
and 5G
The UK government has developed a focused
strategy to enable the UK to be a global leader in
5G technology.102 The government recognizes that
its communications framework will be essential for
automated vehicles because the type of information
that can be transmitted is expected to have a high
impact on the industry. Benefits of success will include
(i) increased vehicle safety (ii) an ability to provide a
range of new services and (iii) reduction of traffic jams,
for example, through improved fleet routing.
Ofcom manages the UK’s airwaves - or spectrum – a

finite resource that is essential for wireless services
including mobile phones. In order to improve mobile
services and enable more people and businesses
to access 5G networks, Ofcom are planning to
release more mobile airwaves through an auction in
spring 2020.
In the UK, Ofcom has allocated spectrum in the 3.4 GHz

band and 3.6-3.8 GHz, as well as 3.8-4.2 GHz bands
later. These airwaves are part of the primary band for
5G and are capable of carrying high volumes of data-
hungry connections in concentrated areas. All four of
the biggest mobile companies have launched 5G and
releasing these airwaves will help increase the capacity
and quality of mobile data services.
The UK government has been consulting widely on its

5G strategy which aims to help maximize benefits.
102 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/next-generation-mobile-technologies-a-5g-strategy-for-the-uk

United States

Regulatory overview John Hickenlooper
Former Governor of Colorado (D)
The United States does not have a federal regulatory
framework currently in place to address autonomous
vehicle testing and deployment. As a result, testing and
deployment is regulated by a patchwork of state-centric
laws. That patchwork is made up of 40 states and DC
that have either passed autonomous vehicle legislation
or are operating under executive orders. Currently, six
states have passed legislation and are also operating
“It’s hard to get the right balance between
under an executive order (WA, WI, IL, ME, MN, HI).
regulation and avoiding the red tape that
There are three main state level strategies for fostering sometimes stifles innovation.”
autonomous vehicle testing. The first is a nonregulatory John Hickenlooper
approach, as adopted in Arizona and Colorado. The Denver Post, June 1, 2017
In Arizona, Governor Doug Ducey has signed two

executive orders pertaining to autonomous vehicles.
Other states, such as California, have taken a more
supervisory approach towards autonomous vehicles.
Doug Ducey
Governor of Arizona (R) At the outset, the state passed legislation directing the
California Department of Motor Vehicles to create pilot
programs. The resulting set of regulations established
three different application and oversight processes —
one for testing with a back-up driver, one for testing
without a back-up driver and one for deployment.
Finally, nine states have taken no action on autonomous

The first directed all state transportation officials to
vehicles at all, but that does not mean there are no
“undertake any necessary steps to support autonomous vehicles operating in those states. A lack
the testing and operation of self-driving of legislation does not mean operating autonomous
vehicles on public roads within Arizona.” The vehicles is illegal, but rather that they are not explicitly
second outlined a process to notify the state of vehicle authorized. In those environments, autonomous
testing, but did not impose any additional regulations. vehicles may operate, as long as they adhere to all
Notably, Arizona has seen significant investment from existing state and federal laws.
the autonomous vehicle industry —almost every large
Before addressing federal legislation and regulation,
autonomous vehicle company has tested or is still
it is important to note that there is a tension between
testing in the state.
the regulatory environment of a state and the public
Colorado has also adopted a non-regulatory approach perception of its openness to the technology.
to autonomous vehicles. The state’s autonomous Oftentimes, states that are highly regulatory, such as
vehicle law, signed by then Governor Hickenlooper, California, receive publicity for seemingly “welcoming”
permits testing as long as the vehicle follows all existing autonomous vehicles into their states. This is because
laws, i.e. the vehicle itself meets federal motor vehicle the state created a new legal regime when, in fact,
safety standards and adheres to basic state traffic states that do very little are the most permissive
laws while in operation. If vehicles are able to adhere testing environments.
to those two requirements, companies do not have to
Therefore, it is incumbent upon companies that
alert the state that tests are being conducted, nor does
want to test in specific states to do their regulatory
a human driver have to be in the vehicle.
due diligence. Conversely from a state perspective,
some Governors and State Legislatures have taken to

Safety Standards, which require several components
within vehicles, tied to human drivers. For example,
all vehicles must have a steering wheel, foot pedals,
Spotlight rear view mirrors, etc., all of which are useless for
fully autonomous cars. In sum, to create a consistent
Self-driving shuttle in Denver regulatory environment throughout the country, the
A self-driving EasyMile shuttle began serving passengers federal government must pass a law to address vehicle
between a commuter rail station and several small office construction, safety, cybersecurity, data and liability.
complexes in Denver in January 2019. The shuttle carries up
to six passengers, travels up to fifteen miles an hour, operates After a prolonged silence on the issue, federal
without any human controls and is open to the public. It is autonomous vehicle legislation has been revived. Over
intended to help Denver’s Regional Transportation District
(RTD) and startup company EasyMile learn how to effectively
the past few months the Republican and Democratic
deploy autonomous technology for public transportation. staffs of the House Energy and Commerce and Senate
Commerce Committees have been holding meetings to
hash out bits and pieces of what could, ultimately, form
a comprehensive autonomous driving bill. Notably, the
bipartisan-bicameral approach has focused, up to this
point, on the issues where there is the most consensus:
exemptions, testing, evaluation and the establishment
of an Automated Vehicles Advisory Council. The
asserting their passivity. By releasing an executive order, bipartisan working group released discussion drafts
or passing legislation similar to Arizona and Colorado for each subsection and have been soliciting feedback
which essentially says, “we are affirming your right to from various stakeholders.
operate in accordance with current law,” companies
will be alerted that the state is actively promoting itself Roger Wicker
United States Senator (R-Miss)
as a testing ground. While there is little difference,
statutorily, between Colorado and a state with no
autonomous vehicle law, there is a difference from a
public relations standpoint.
“Therefore, it is incumbent upon

companies that want to test in specific Chairman Roger Wicker (R-Miss) noted during a hearing
states to do their regulatory due diligence…. in November that the Senate Commerce Committee
…While there is little difference, statutorily, “already received more than 100 letters
between Colorado and a state with from industry, state and local governments,
no autonomous vehicle law, there is and consumer and disability advocates.”
a difference from a public relations
standpoint.” While exemptions and testing have always been part
of the conversation, the Advisory Council, as least as
That being said, in the long term, every state treating
it is presented in the working draft, is a new wrinkle.
the technology differently is not ideal. Companies have
It would be tasked with developing and presenting to
expressed to both state and federal lawmakers that
the Secretary of Transportation “technical advice, best
they do not want to navigate a new set of regulations
practices and recommendations” regarding a host of
every time their vehicles cross state lines. Adding to the
issues surrounding the autonomous vehicle industry.
complexity is the fact that the regulations which govern
These include, but are not limited to, equitable access,
vehicle construction, are written and enforced on the
education, cybersecurity, labor and employment,
federal level by the National Highway Traffic Safety
environmental impact, and safety. Notably, the
Administration. The National Highway Traffic Safety
last public working draft for vehicle exemptions
Administration controls the Federal Motor Vehicle
is littered with brackets that denote un-finalized

language, highlighting the long road ahead before
lawmakers settle on a final compromise. Moreover, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)
sections concerning cybersecurity protections have
yet to be circulated in any formal fashion. In fact, a
spokesperson for the House Energy and Commerce
Committee commented that there is no timetable for
the introduction of legislation. One potential point of
conflict that could derail the new bill is safety. The draft
text gives the US Department of Transportation ten
years to produce a plan for safety standards, a period of
time that some believe is too long. Notably, the current Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
draft legislation does contain language to require

autonomous vehicle companies to submit individual,
company specific safety reports to USDOT. However,
it does not contain any specifics on the content or
metrics the reports would need to include.
Of course, this is only the latest of several efforts to

pass federal driverless vehicle legislation. Previously,
Congress was close to passing such a law, but Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
ultimately fell short. The SELF Drive Act unanimously

passed the US House of Representatives in September
2017 and a few months later a sister bill in the Senate,
the AV START Act, was approved by the Senate
Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation.
However, the bill was not brought to the floor in 2018.
In the lame duck session, after Democrats had gained
a majority in the House of Representatives, there was a
Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA)
sliver of hope as the bill began to gain momentum, and
for a brief moment it seemed it would pass. Ultimately,
however, safety and cybersecurity concerns raised
by Sens. Ed Markey (D-MA), Richard Blumenthal (D-
CT), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
and Tom Udall (D-NM) coupled with tepid on-again,
off-again support from the American Association for
Justice, doomed the legislation.
Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM)
“We are concerned that the bill indefinitely
preempts state and local safety regulations
even if federal safety standards are never
developed,” the senators wrote. The senators
continued: “Until new safety standards are
put in place, the interim framework must
provide the same level of safety as current
standards. Self-driving cars should be no
more likely to crash than cars currently do,
and should provide no less protection to
occupants or pedestrians in the event of a
crash.”
The trial lawyers association remains highly interested Although, given several hot button issues have been
in any bill dealing with driverless vehicles and as such, thus far left out of the conversation entirely, it is still
the organization will remain involved in the developing unclear how closely any new legislation will resemble
conversations going forward. In fact, according to prior efforts. Chairman Wicker said it was “a good
Politico, leaving out any arbitration language was question” how much they would borrow from prior
the cost of entry for Democrats’ participation in the efforts. Suffice to say, the form and function of any
current negotiation process. Many of the principles forthcoming federal law on autonomous vehicles is
of the previous bill will, inevitably, be resuscitated so murky at best.
it’s important to understand what it would have done.
Regardless of Congress, the Department of
First it would have increased the number of National
Transportation (DOT) is moving forward with guidance
Highway Traffic Safety exemptions. Safety exemptions
promulgation, rule-making and incentives for research
are given to autonomous vehicle companies so
and development including $60 million in federal
they can test vehicles that do not meet the federal
grants to eight autonomous vehicle projects in
standards; vehicles that, for example, do not have a
Texas, Iowa, Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan
steering wheel. In addition, it would spur an update
and California. Moreover, on Wednesday January 8
of the federal standards to render waivers obsolete,
Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao announced the
institute new cybersecurity protections, define data
release of DOT’s fourth generation Autonomous Vehicle
ownership and settle liability concerns. Notably,
guidance.
any federal legislation would preempt state laws,
ensuring that, as it relates to vehicle design and safety,
Elaine Chao
technology legal in one state, is not rendered useless in United States Secretary of Transportation (R)
another.
Spotlight
Las Vegas, Nevada
“Integrating the autonomous vehicle technology
When riders hail a Lyft in Las Vegas, Nevada, into our transportation system has the potential
they might be picked up in a car with a driver to increase productivity, facilitate freight
whose hands are off the wheel. The company movement and create new types of jobs.”
says its fleet has completed over 55,000 Elaine Chao
autonomous trips through a partnership with Transport Topics, October 4, 2018
autonomous vehicle company Aptiv. By most
This newest version of the guidance, which is strictly
metrics the testing has largely been successful.
voluntary, expands upon version 2.0 which focused
The average rating for the vehicles is 4.97 stars,
on safety and version 3.0 that consolidated the DOT
and 92 percent of riders indicated they felt safe
position into “one DOT approach.” This newest version
during their trips.
provides a unified position from the entire federal
government and includes, for the first time, input
from the White House. In sum, the report enumerates
a policy approach for the 38 federal agencies,
commissions and White House offices that engage
with the technology in some form or fashion. Similar
to previous reports, version 4.0 does not include any
binding requirements and instead asks manufacturers
to submit voluntary safety assessments. Looking
ahead, to further bolster autonomous vehicle expertise,
the federal government spending bill signed into

law on December 20, 2019, includes $5 million for
the Department of Transportation to create a “Highly
Automated Systems Safety Center of Excellence.” Spotlight
Additionally, both the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) and Federal Motor Carrier Autonomous grocery delivery
Safety Administration recently concluded public in Houston, Texas
comment periods aimed at determining whether the
Nuro, a self-driving startup founded by two
rules and regulations currently in place are, collectively,
ex-Google engineers, has been experimenting
obstacles to the effective rollout of autonomous
with autonomous grocery delivery in Houston,
vehicles. The National Highway Traffic Safety
Texas. Thanks to a partnership with Kroger
Administration requested comments on challenges
and more recently Wal-Mart, groceries will
concerning testing and compliance with Federal
be delivered via Nuro’s fleet of self-driving
Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS), in vehicles
Toyota Prius vehicles, and each car will have a
that lack human controls. Similarly, the Federal Motor
safety driver behind the wheel. Eventually, the
Carrier Safety Administration asked for comments on
company plans on deploying its custom-built
any Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulation sections
R1 driverless delivery vehicles. The R1 vehicle is
that may need to be “amended, revised, or eliminated”
about half as wide as a compact sedan, shorter
to facilitate the public deployment of commercial
than most cars, and it has no room inside for
motor vehicles.
human passengers or drivers.
Without a new law or a significant rule making push,
automakers will continue to be constrained by the
FMVSS. These prescriptive standards define how
In addition to vehicle construction, safety is top of mind
nearly every component of a vehicle is designed and
for lawmakers and regulators, alike. In an attempt to
constructed. They address everything from the position
balance safety will technological progress the NHTSA
of rearview mirrors to the need for power-operated
put out voluntary guidelines for AV companies to
windows. A significant number of the standards assume
submit a safety self-assessment. Chairman Robert
the presence of a human operator in the vehicle. For
Sumwalt of the National Transportation Safety Board
example, FMVSS specifies how components must react
(NTSB), an independent government investigative
to a driver turning the wheel, pressing the brake pedal
agency responsible for civil transportation, called for
and engaging a turn signal, just three of the estimated
NHTSA to make the safety assessments a requirement,
30-plus driver-specific vehicle requirements.
a suggestion that has been incorporated into the
As vehicles become more advanced, many of the draft bill. Sumwalt noted that only a handful of the
human controls will be unnecessary. In 2015 Waymo companies testing autonomous vehicles had actually
requested an interpretation from NHTSA as to how the done the self-assessment. Ranking member of the
agency would treat a vehicle without human controls. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and
NHTSA responded that it would accept the vehicle as Transportation, Maria Cantwell (D-WA), agrees with
the driver, but it could not interpret the lack of human Chairman Sumwalt and is pressing the NHTSA to
controls as compliant with FMVSS. As such, Waymo establish a minimum standard of safety.
and other automakers have, for the most part, halted
the construction of new utilitarian vehicles devoid of
human controls, in favor of manufacturing traditional
vehicles with autonomous technologies. Those vehicles
can operate freely, regardless of its level of autonomy,
as long as the vehicle is compliant with FMVSS and
state law.

In response, acting NHTSA administrator James Owens noted that the agency is attempting to balance regulation
with innovation. He said “If we establish standards too quickly we run the risk of stymieing innovation. We want
to step back, we want to let the innovation occur and competition occur.” He went on to say that consumer
education is also an important step to ensure the technology is being utilized responsibly.
At this point, it is clear that until a law is passed by

the United States Congress, rule-making, guidance “If we establish standards too quickly we run
promulgation and state pre-eminence will define the risk of stymieing innovation. We want to step
the autonomous vehicle industry’s relationship with back, we want to let the innovation occur and
government in the United States. competition occur.”
States with autonomous vehicles James Owens
Acting NJTSA administrator
enacted legislation
States with and executive
autonomous vehicles orders
Driverless vehicleand
enacted legislation testing andorders
executive deployment
STATE ROUNDUP
WA ND
MT MN
VT NH
ME
SDND WI
WA
OR MT Enacted legislation
ID MN
WY MI NY VT NH
IA MA
ME
NE
SD WI Executive order
OR PA RI Enacted legislation
ID IL IN OH
NV WY MI NY CT
UT CO IA NJMA
KS
NE MO WV Both
Executive order
KY VA PA DERI
CA
NV IL IN OH CT
TN MD
UT CO OK NC NJ None
Both
AZ NM KS MO
AR WV DC
KY SC VA DE
CA
MS AL GA MD
OK LA TN NC None
AZ NM TX AR DC
SC
MS AL GA
LA FL
TX
FL
AS MP
AK
HI AS MP
AK VI
HI
PR GU
VI
PR GU
Source: http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/autonomous-vehicles-self-driving-vehicles-enacted-legislation.aspx
Source: http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/autonomous-vehicles-self-driving-vehicles-enacted-legislation.aspx
Alabama
Alabama has passed regulations on commercial autonomous vehicles to operate in the state. Vehicles can
operate either with or without a physical driver as long as a remote driver is capable of operating the vehicle. The
Department of Transportation has sole and exclusive jurisdiction over automated driving systems, autonomous
vehicles, and teleoperations systems. The state has also passed legislation concerning autonomous truck
platooning. Finally, in 2017, the state Senate created a Legislative Committee on Self-Driving Vehicles which was
reauthorized this past year.
Bills Passed in 2019: Senate Bill 47, Senate Joint Resolution 21

Arizona Colorado
Arizona has one of the most permissive AV frameworks Companies seeking to test and operate autonomous
in the country, thanks to a series of executive orders vehicles in Colorado are greeted by a welcoming
signed by Gov. Doug Ducey. Automakers need only to regulatory environment. Legislation enacted in 2017
notify the Arizona Department of Transportation before allows driverless vehicles to be operated in the
testing, as long as their vehicles comply with state and state as long as they are capable of complying with
federal laws governing motor vehicles. The welcoming existing state and federal law. Additionally, legislation
nature of Arizona’s regulatory structure has solidified passed this year requires the State Department of
its standing as a hotbed of AV innovation. Waymo Transportation to convene a working group to examine
has been testing in the state for years and recently the impact of technology, including autonomy, on
expanded the service through a partnership with transportation business models. The group is required
ridesharing company Lyft. to make a recommendation to the legislature.
Colorado’s Department of Transportation is partnering

with Ford, Panasonic and Qualcomm to deploy Cellular
Arkansas
Vehicle-to-Everything (C-V2X) technology along the
Arkansas permits the operation of autonomous vehicles heavily traveled Interstate 70 corridor. Although the
and fully autonomous vehicles on public streets state does not currently have any large-scale robo-
and highways through an autonomous vehicle pilot taxi fleets, tech company EasyMile began testing a
program overseen by the State Highway Commission. 15-passenger autonomous shuttle near the Denver
The state imposed certain requirements for the Airport this year.
autonomous vehicles pilot program and has granted
Bills Passed in 2019: Senate Bill 239
authority to the Commission to adopt rules necessary
for its implementation. Notably, the law authorizes Connecticut
the operation of up to three vehicles void of certain
Of the states that have passed autonomous
standard safety equipment at any given time. The state
vehicle laws, Connecticut has one of the strictest
already allowed Driver Assistive Truck Platooning (DATP)
regulatory structures. Operators must go through
under legislation that took effect in 2017.
a multistage approval process, and testing will only
Bills Passed in 2019: House Bill 1822, House Bill 1561 be allowed in select municipalities, to be designated
by the commissioner of the State Department of
California
Transportation. Several municipalities working with
California has taken a comprehensive approach to manufacturers such as French company Navya, have
regulating autonomous vehicles, enacting several laws applied, or said they plan to apply, for a spot in the
that lay out procedures for the testing and deployment Fully Autonomous Vehicle Testing Pilot Program.
of driverless cars. The state expanded its program from Connecticut did loosen the reigns this past year, if
requiring backup drivers in all test vehicles, to also only nominally, by removing the requirement that test
allowing self-driving car tests without backup drivers. drivers must be seated in the driver’s seat while testing
Operators must meet specific requirements and go the vehicle. Instead, it states that the operator must be
through a DMV-administered application process. physically inside the AV in order to engage the system.
Over 50 companies currently hold permits to test in The state has also established a task force to study fully
California. autonomous vehicles.
Delaware
The Contra Costa Transportation Authority was
awarded a portion of the $60 million in federal grant Governor John Carney signed an executive order
funding allocated for automated driving systems to establish an Advisory Council on Connected and
research for its Contra Costa Transportation Authority’s Autonomous Vehicles. The Advisory Council was tasked
ADS Demonstration Program. with developing recommendations for innovative tools
and strategies that can be used to prepare Delaware’s

transportation network for connected and autonomous Authority, with $1 million dedicated to the study and
vehicles. The Advisory Council’s final report was development of innovative options for transit, as well
submitted in September 2018. The report has not as established the Multi-use Corridors of Regional
spurred any successful legislation to this point. Economic Significance Program within the department
of transportation.
Florida
Bills Passed in 2019: House Bill 311, Senate Bill 2500,
In June, Florida passed House Bill 311 to further relax
Senate Bill 7068
its autonomous vehicle regulations. Under the new
law, any driverless vehicle is allowed to operate in the Georgia
state as long as it is capable of complying with existing
Georgia allows the operation of both autonomous
state and federal laws, and has liability insurance of
vehicles and trucks under legislation passed in 2017.
$1 million. It also removed the requirement that a
Driverless vehicles are free to operate in the state as
person is required to possess a valid drivers license to
long as they are fully insured and registered with the
operate a fully autonomous vehicle and provides that
Department of Motor Vehicles. At present, no robo-taxi
the automated driving system, rather than a person, is
services are operating in the state, however, several
deemed the operator of an autonomous vehicle when
autonomous shuttle projects are in their infancy,
operating with the automated driving system engaged.
including an Olli autonomous shuttle that traverses a 1.5
Autonomous or fully autonomous vehicles equipped
mile track in the Peachtree Corners Curiosity Lab.
with a teleoperation system may operate without a
human operator in the vehicle when the teleoperation Hawaiì
system is engaged and certain requirements are met.
Executive Order 17-07, signed by Gov. David Ige, signals
Moreover, Florida now permits on-demand that the state is “open for business for testing and
autonomous vehicle networks to operate pursuant deploying new driverless vehicles,” and directs several
to state laws with the same insurance requirements state departments to work with any companies wishing
applicable to a transportation network company. to test autonomous vehicles in Hawaiì. Yet despite
Finally, the law authorizes the Florida Turnpike the state’s mild weather conditions, and the University
Enterprise to enter into one or more agreements of Hawaiì opening a dedicated research lab, there
(including with private entities) to fund, construct, has not been widespread testing or deployment of
and operate facilities for the advancement of driverless vehicles in the state. The state established
autonomous and connected innovative transportation an Autonomous Vehicle Task Force to make further
technologies, for the purposes of improving safety and recommendations to the state legislature. Dentons
decreasing congestion. Partner William Kaneko is a member of the task force.
San Francisco-based, Starsky Robotics was among the Bills Passed in 2016: House Concurrent Resolution 220
first companies to take advantage of the new law by
Idaho
testing a fully unmanned truck on a nine-mile stretch
of the Florida Turnpike. The company plans to use Idaho Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter signed Executive
autonomous technology to operate its trucks on Florida Order 2018-01 on January 2, 2018 to create the
highways, relying on remote operators in Jacksonville to Autonomous and Connected Vehicle Testing and
guide the trucks from the beginning to the end of their Deployment Committee to identify relevant state
journey. Florida has made inroads in other segments of agencies to support the testing and deployment of
the AV industry, as well, with microelectronics company, autonomous and connected vehicles.
BRIDG, AV-testing company Suntrax and LiDAR
manufacturer Luminar all recently announcing plans to The Committee submitted its report in November
set up operations in the state. 2018. The report has not yet spurred any successful
legislation to this point.
The State of Florida has also taken steps to incentivize
and fund innovative research. The State appropriated
$2.5 million for the Tampa Bay Regional Transit

Illinois Louisiana
While Illinois has no legislation directly regulating Louisiana law allows for the operation of both
autonomous vehicles, an executive order signed by autonomous vehicles and autonomous truck platoons
former Gov. Bruce Rauner allows their operation in the and specifically authorizes autonomous commercial
state. The order establishes the Autonomous Illinois motor vehicles to operate without a conventional driver
Testing Program, overseen by the state Department of physically present in the vehicle if the autonomous
Transportation. Vehicles can only be operated with an commercial motor vehicle meets a set of criteria
employee of the manufacturer behind the wheel. including that the vehicle is capable of operating in
compliance with applicable law and is capable of
Indiana
achieving a minimal risk condition in the event of an
Indiana currently has no laws or regulations concerning emergency.
autonomous vehicles; however truck platooning is
The Department of Transportation and Development
regulated under 2017 legislation. There have been
is the sole agency with jurisdiction over autonomous
efforts in the past to create an autonomous task force
commercial motor vehicles and automated driving
with the power to approve operation of fully driverless
systems. Operators must submit verifications and other
vehicles in the state, but all have failed to garner
documents to the Department of Transportation prior
enough support to pass into law.
to operation.
Iowa
Bills Passed in 2019: House Bill 455
Iowa allows driverless vehicles to operate on the
Maine
public highways without a conventional human driver
physically in the vehicle if it meets a set of conditions, Maine does not currently have any laws or regulations
including that the vehicle is capable of achieving a pertaining to autonomous vehicles. However, 2018
minimal risk condition in the event of a malfunction and legislation authorized the creation of a Commission
that the vehicle is capable of operating in compliance on Autonomous Vehicles to coordinate efforts among
with the applicable traffic and motor vehicle safety laws state agencies and knowledgeable stakeholders
and regulations. to develop a process for testing automated driving
systems on public roads. The law requires that the
Iowa also authorizes on-demand driverless-capable
Commission issue a final report containing findings and
vehicle networks, to facilitate the transportation of
recommendations, including suggested legislation.
persons or goods, including transportation for hire.
In addition Governor Paul LePage signed an executive
The University of Iowa was awarded a portion of the
order creating the Maine Highly Automated Vehicles
$60 million in federal grant funding allocated for
(HAV) Advisory Committee to oversee the introduction
automated driving systems research for its ADS for
of highly automated vehicles. The committee is tasked
Rural America project.
with making recommendations regarding proposed
Bills Passed in 2019: Senate File 302 HAV Pilot Projects and handling applications for permits
to operate pilot vehicles on public roadways in Maine.
Kentucky
Maryland
Kentucky has set forth rules for commercial vehicle
platooning including exempting any vehicles engaged While Maryland doesn’t have any laws explicitly
in a platoon from “following too closely” laws. Former governing autonomous vehicles, the state Department
Governor Bevin, at the urging of the Kentucky of Transportation has adopted regulations for their
Aerospace Industry Consortium, verbally supported the operation, including an approval process requiring
launch of “Elevate Kentucky,” an initiative to establish operator self-certification and insurance coverage of
Kentucky as an autonomous vehicle testing hotbed. $5 million.
That being said, no legislative efforts have come to pass
on autonomous passenger vehicles.

Massachusetts system and giving the state DOT wide latitude to decide
whether to allow a business to test based on its history
A 2017 executive order issued by Gov. Charlie Baker
with self-driving technology. The Minnesota Legislature
enumerated extensive requirements for the operation
has yet to decide the issue.
of autonomous vehicles in the state, including setting
maximum speeds and confining them to geo-fenced Minnesota has passed legislation regarding platooning
areas determined during the application process. on freeways and expressways. A platooning system
Boston-based nuTonomy and Optimus Ride have may only be used if a plan has been approved by the
already been piloting their vehicles in Boston for Commissioner of Transportation, who must consult
over a year, and over 15 municipalities have signed with the Commissioner of Public Safety prior to
agreements with the state allowing for testing. approving the plan.
A previous executive order established a working Bills Passed in 2019: House Bill 6
group on AVs which is expected to work with experts
on vehicle safety and automation and members of the Mississippi
legislature on proposed legislation.
Mississippi has yet to pass legislation concerning
Michigan autonomous passenger vehicles. However, the state
does permit platooning as long as the operator receives
As the home of the nation’s auto manufacturing approval from the Department of Transportation and
industry, it’s no surprise that Michigan is one of the the Department of Public Safety.
nation’s AV testing hubs. In 2016, the state approved
legislation allowing for pilot testing. Waymo recently Nebraska
announced plans to locate the nation’s first factory
In April 2018, Nebraska lawmakers cleared the way
dedicated to the manufacture of autonomous
for companies to test self-driving vehicles as long
vehicles in Detroit. The state is also home to several
as the vehicle is capable of operating in compliance
large testing facilities including the University of
with traffic and motor vehicle safety laws. The AV may
Michigan-owned Mcity, a 32-acre mock city and
or may not contain a human driver, but if a human
proving ground built for the testing of driverless cars
driver is present, he or she must be a licensed driver
that contains over four miles of roadway fitted with
and covered by insurance. The law also authorizes
connected-vehicle infrastructure.
the operation of an on-demand AV network for the
Michigan has also passed several laws dealing with transport of persons or goods, including for-hire
liability in relation to autonomous vehicles. transportation or public transportation.
Nevada
The City of Detroit was awarded a portion of the $60
million in federal grant funding allocated for automated Ever since Nevada passed AV legislation in 2012, the
driving systems research for its Michigan Mobility state has been at the forefront of driverless vehicle
Collaborative - ADS Demonstration project. innovation. State law permits the operation of fully
Minnesota autonomous vehicles without a human operator in the
vehicle and specifies that the original manufacturer is
Minnesota has no laws or regulations specifically not liable for damages if a vehicle has been modified by
addressing autonomous vehicles. According to the an unauthorized third party. A publicly available robo-
state’s Department of Transportation, any automated taxi network—a partnership between AV company Aptiv
vehicles operating in the state must adhere to “current and ridesharing company Lyft—is currently operating in
statute and laws.” However in 2018, Gov. Mark Dayton the state.
signed an executive order creating a Governor’s
New Hampshire
Advisory Council on Connected and Automated
Vehicles to recommend a path forward. Its resulting After previously vetoing a bill to permit autonomous
66-page report delivered a rosy outlook on automated vehicle testing in New Hampshire, Gov. Chris Sununu
cars and included draft legislation setting up a permit signed into law a bill that creates an automated vehicle

testing pilot program in New Hampshire. The new law State law does not require a human driver to operate
creates an autonomous vehicle advisory commission, a on the public highway if the autonomous vehicle
testing pilot program and sets requirements for vehicle is capable of achieving a minimal risk condition in
deployment. The new pilot program permits testing on case a system failure. The law permits on-demand
public roads. autonomous vehicle networks to provide transportation
of persons or goods.
North Dakota also allows for truck platooning subject to
New Jersey
the Department of Transportation, in coordination with
New Jersey established an 11-member tasked force the state highway patrol superintendent, developing an
called the New Jersey Advanced Autonomous operational plan that provides guidelines for operation.
Vehicle Task Force to study autonomous vehicles and The plan must include operational information that
recommend laws, rules and regulations that New Jersey must be provided by a platoon technology provider or
may enact to integrate autonomous transportation into commercial motor vehicle operator.
the state’s transportation system.
Bills Passed in 2019: House Bill 199, House Bill 1418
Bills Passed in 2019: Assembly Joint Resolution 164 Ohio
New York
A 2018 executive order (EO) signed by former Gov. John
New York has highly restrictive regulations on AV Kasich positioned Ohio as a leader in the driverless
testing. Under legislation approved in 2017, any vehicle space. To attract AV researchers, developers
testing must be approved by the commissioner of the and manufacturers, the EO created DriveOhio, a new
Department of Motor Vehicles and supervised by the division of the state Department of Transportation that
New York State Police. While more relaxed requirements allows any company to test AVs in the state as long
were proposed in previous legislative sessions, as they register with DriveOhio and have a backup
they failed to pass. Additionally, the New York Bar driver behind the wheel. Four cities—Columbus,
Association established The Task Force on Autonomous Dublin, Athens and Marysville—have already signed
Vehicles and the Law to investigate how the law should agreements with DriveOhio to test AVs on their
adapt to the rise of autonomous vehicles. Dentons streets, and the state has designated a 35-mile stretch
Senior Counsel Ronald Hedges is a member of the of US Route 33 a “Smart Mobility Corridor” for the
task force. deployment of connected vehicle technologies. A $45
million SMART Testing center opened in Logan County.
North Carolina
Funded by a partnership between Ohio State University
Autonomous vehicles in North Carolina face few and the state of Ohio, the center will include an indoor
restrictions. A 2017 law established regulations for highway track capable of simulating ice and snow year-
the operation of fully autonomous motor vehicles on round.
public highways of the state. It also established the The Ohio Department of Transportation was awarded
Fully Autonomous Vehicle Committee to study the a portion of the $60 million in federal grant funding
issue. Notably, the North Carolina Turnpike Authority allocated for automated driving systems research for
(NCTA) has touted Triangle Expressway near Raleigh as its D.A.T.A In Ohio: Deploying Automated Technology
one of the most advanced roads in the country, with a Anywhere project.
fiber-optic network along its entire length to facilitate
connected infrastructure. The NCTA has tested several Oklahoma
driverless vehicles along the corridor.
Oklahoma hasn’t passed legislation to establish specific
North Dakota autonomous vehicle regulations but has asserted
that only the State may enact laws or regulations
North Dakota permits autonomous vehicle operation on autonomous driving systems. The state has also
as long as the vehicle is capable of operating in exempted platoons from certain traffic laws.
compliance with all applicable federal and state law.

Bills Passed in 2019: Senate Bill 189, Senate Bill 365 coordinated speeds and distance intervals that are
closer than otherwise allowed under the “following too
Oregon
closely” laws in the state.
Oregon has no current regulations in place concerning
Bills Passed in 2019: House Bill 1068
autonomous vehicles. However, House Bill 4063,
signed by Gov. Kate Brown on April 10, 2018, named Tennessee
the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) the
Legislation passed in 2017 allows certified autonomous
state’s lead agency on automated vehicle policy and
vehicles to operate in the state, provided they contain
directed ODOT to facilitate a task force on automated
automatic crash recording and notification technology.
vehicles. The Task Force submitted its first report to the
The law also preempts local regulation of ADS-operated
legislature on Sept. 10, 2018 and its second on Sept. 9,
vehicles and specifies that the ADS shall be considered
2019. The task force voted to continue meeting on an
a driver for liability purposes when it is fully engaged
ad hoc basis in response to significant developments
and operated properly. The TennSmart consortium,
in automated vehicle technology and policy. The task
made up of government agencies, universities, and
force will dissolve on January 2, 2021.
companies with ties to the state, hopes to encourage
Pennsylvania collaboration and innovation in the AV area.
Pennsylvania law does not explicitly regulate Texas

autonomous vehicle testing, but the state Department
Texas’s AV-friendly regulatory environment has made
of Transportation has created a voluntary registration
the state a magnet for autonomous vehicle testing.
process. Additionally, Pennsylvania has established
State law allows an automated motor vehicle to operate
regulations on truck platooning and created the
in the state regardless of whether a human operator is
Highly Automated Vehicle Advisory Committee within
present in the vehicle, as long as certain requirements
the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. The
are met. Texas also preempts local regulation of
Committee is required to submit a report annually.
automated motor vehicles and automated driving
Pittsburgh, thanks to a friendly regulatory climate systems. The Texas A&M Engineering Experiment
and local government incentives, has become a Station was awarded a portion of the $60 million in
hotbed of AV testing. Currently Aptiv, Argo AI, Aurora federal grant funding allocated for automated driving
Innovation and Uber are testing in the city, and Argo systems research for its Automated Vehicle for All
recently announced a five-year, $15 million research project.
partnership with Carnegie Mellon University to develop
Utah
autonomous technology.
Driverless vehicles are now regulated on Utah roads
The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation was
under legislation approved in 2019. While any properly
awarded a portion of the $60 million in federal grant
insured autonomous vehicles are allowed to operate,
funding allocated for automated driving systems
autonomous networks must be registered with the
research for its Safe Integration of Automated Vehicles
state. Vehicles must be operated in compliance with
(AV) in Work Zones project.
all applicable traffic and safety laws and must be able
South Carolina to achieve a minimal risk condition or make a request
to intervene if a system failure occurs. Finally, Utah
South Carolina has yet to pass legislation on permits the Department of Transportation to obtain,
autonomous passenger vehicles but it has exempted collect and utilizes anonymized location data of
platoons form certain traffic laws. connected vehicles.
South Dakota
Bills Passed in 2019: Senate Bill 72, House Bill 101
South Dakota has directed the Transportation
Commission to promulgate rules to authorize the
testing and operation of platooning at electronically

Virginia public roads.” The executive order establishes an
interagency workgroup and enables pilot programs
In a state where AV testing is actively occurring, Virginia
throughout the state. The order specifies certain
has no laws or regulations specifically pertaining to
requirements for vehicles operated with human
autonomous vehicles. However, the state has taken
operators present in the vehicle and for vehicles
an active role in encouraging testing and deployment.
operated without human operators in the vehicle.
Seventy miles of Virginia highways have been
designated “automated corridors” and outfitted with In addition, the State Legislature passed HB 2970
high-definition mapping and data acquisition systems in the 2018 Legislative session which directs the
to support automated-vehicle testing. Virginia is a prime Transportation Commission to “…convene an
example of the fact that autonomous vehicles can executive and legislative work group to develop
operate in any state, regardless of whether the state has policy recommendations to address the operation of
a regulatory framework, as long as the operator adheres autonomous vehicles on public roadways in the state…”
to state and federal law.
The Autonomous Vehicle (AV) Work Group submitted
Virginia Tech Transportation Institute was awarded recommendations including possible policies, laws, and
a portion of the $60 million in federal grant funding rules to support the operation of AV’s in the state. The
allocated for automated driving systems research for Work Group will remain in place through 2023.
both its Safely Operating ADS in Challenging Dynamic
Washington, DC
Scenarios: An Optimized Automated Driving Corridor
Demonstration project and its Trucking Fleet CONOPS In 2012 the District of Columbia became one of the first
for Managing Mixed Fleets project. jurisdictions to pass legislation regarding the testing
Vermont of autonomous vehicles. All vehicles tested in the city
must have backup drivers and be capable of following
Vermont has established an automated vehicle the city’s traffic laws. An Autonomous Vehicle Working
testing program and granted authority to the Agency Group, established by Mayor Bowser in February
of Transportation to adopt specific rules. State law 2018, (Mayor’s Order 2018-018), has been exploring
requires that during a test an operator is seated in the implications of autonomous vehicles, including
the driver’s seat of the automated vehicle monitoring workforce and employment, urban planning, parking,
the operation of the vehicle and is capable of taking and a range of other issues.
immediate control if necessary. The Traffic Committee
Wisconsin
has sole authority to approve test permit applications
and is directed to hold a public hearing before Former Governor Scott Walker signed an executive
approving a permit application. The committee may order in May 2017 creating the Governor’s Steering
approve automated vehicle tests only if municipalities Committee on Autonomous and Connected Vehicle
have preapproved such tests. The legislature has Testing and Deployment within the state Department
directed the Agency of Transportation to publish of Transportation. The committee was tasked with
an Agency of Transportation’s Automated Vehicle advising the governor “on how best to advance the
Testing Guide, by January 1, 2021, that includes a list testing and operation of autonomous and connected
of municipalities that have preapproved testing of vehicles in the State of Wisconsin.” The Committee
automated vehicles on certain highways within their submitted their report in 2018 and made several
geographic boundaries. recommendations, including requiring municipal
oversight, an application process and backup drivers.
While these have yet to be enacted, the committee
Washington also noted that it believes current state law “does not
prohibit the operation of autonomous vehicles.” Much
Governor Jay Inslee signed an executive order in June like Virginia, Wisconsin is another example of a state
2017 to require that state agencies with pertinent that has no autonomous-specific regulations but still
regulatory jurisdiction “support the safe testing and plays host to autonomous testing.
operation of autonomous vehicles on Washington’s

Liability autonomous vehicle test, the instructions the company
gives about what the driver should do when he is
Traditional liability laws rely on the assumption behind the wheel, and how he or she should respond
that a human driver is in control of the vehicle. The in certain situations. What instructions will be deemed
inevitable deployment of driverless transportation will reasonable and sufficient to enable companies to limit
systematically change the way liability laws are applied. or avoid liability in the event of an accident has yet to
Current legal frameworks are ill-equipped to determine be determined.
who is at fault—the owner, operator, passenger,
In addition to changes in the law, industry disruptions
manufacturer or coder — and will be increasingly
are on the horizon. Specifically, autonomous
strained in determining who or what is in control of the
technology will significantly alter traditional auto
vehicle. Federal regulators have offered little guidance
insurance. Autonomous technology promises to
on the matter, with the Department of Transportation’s
make cars increasingly safer, which will significantly
guidance stating that compliance with federal safety
reduce accident frequency and, potentially, accident
standards “does not automatically exempt severity. KPMG estimated in a 2017 white paper that the
any person from liability at common law, industry’s aggregate losses—the amount paid for all
including tort liability for harm caused by automobile accidents—could fall by roughly $137 billion
negligent conduct.” Thus, dealing with this issue in nominal dollars by 2050.
will primarily be the responsibility of state legislatures As fleets of roadworthy vehicles transition from the non-
and courts to determine liability rules for autonomous autonomous status quo to partial driver substitution
vehicles. technology to a state of near-complete autonomy, the
Currently, most states have both tort liability laws culpability arising from accidents will most likely move
holding drivers responsible for any accidents they from the consumer to the auto manufacturer. Thus, the
cause as well as manufacturing liability laws detailing role of companies that manufacture or design software
manufacturers’ liability for any defects in their for autonomous vehicles in the insurance industry will
products. Uncertainty over which of these laws apply likely disrupt the marketplace in three key ways.
to companies that manufacture or design software First, we can expect a shift to manufacturers of driving
for autonomous vehicles will lead to widespread risk and associated liability as more driving decisions
confusion and increased legal costs in the absence of are made by a vehicle’s proprietary algorithmic “brain.”
new legislation clarifying liability. Some states, such In 2015, Volvo Car Group was one of the first car makers
as Michigan and Nevada, have limited manufacturer in the world to announce that they would accept
liability by stating that manufacturers cannot be held responsibility and liability should an accident occur due
liable for any unauthorized third-party modifications to their autonomous technology. Since then, multiple
to their vehicles. Other states have implemented other car makers have made similar statements.
varying definitions of “operator” for liability laws. For
example, under Texas law the owner of the vehicle is Second, in an environment where driving decisions are
responsible for accidents and traffic violations, whereas shared between the driver and the vehicle, we may see
in Tennessee the manufacturer assumes liability for a consolidation of legal exposure. Providing insurance
any instances where their automated driving system is to both the driver and the manufacturer could prove to
in control. be a legal advantage by reducing the volume of cross-
suits between the two regarding blame.
Even in cases where a test driver is present, it is
foreseeable that the company could be held liable Third, the next generation of cars will capture increasing
for the safety driver’s actions, or inactions, under amounts of data via an array of sensors and cameras.
theories of negligent hiring and negligent supervision, Who will get to use and control that data?
as well as under respondeat superior. Critical liability
Finally, control of the new driving data, relationship
factors are likely to include the content and extent of
between the vehicle and its owner and assumptions of
the training the company requires the safety driver to
legal exposure will allow the manufacturers to redefine
undergo before putting him on the road as part of an

the driving insurance marketplace. In the future, the information to third parties. California also has a new
manufacturer could disintermediate the insurance IoT law that took effect on January 1, 2020 that will
companies altogether. require manufacturers of connected devices to equip
their devices with reasonable security mechanisms to
Data privacy and security protect against data loss and exposure. Moreover, the
new California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), which
As Internet-connected technology is integrated also took effect on January 1, 2020, will significantly
into more parts of everyday life, companies are impact how IoT companies, including CAVs, collect,
gathering more consumer data through increasingly use, store, and share the personal information of
sophisticated technology, including the use of internet California residents. The CCPA is particularly relevant to
of things (IoT) technology by connected autonomous CAVs because the definition of “personal information”
vehicles (CAVs) US laws governing data privacy and is so broad that it includes IP address, geolocation data,
information security are quickly falling behind. and consumer tendency data which may be relevant
to CAV passengers. The CCPA is the first law in the US
The laws and regulations governing data privacy and that will give consumers broad new rights to request
information security in the US are largely sectoral, access to their personal information, request that the
which has resulted in a patchwork of federal and state information be deleted, and opt-out of the sale of their
standards across multiple industries. At the federal personal information (similar to rights existing within
level, there is no uniform data privacy or information the European Union). Dozens of other states are likely to
security law. Instead, the Federal Trade Commission introduce their own version of the CCPA in the coming
(FTC) broadly enforces data privacy and information legislative sessions.
security standards through a variety of mechanisms,
including “unfair and deceptive trade practice” The increased combination of internet connectivity
enforcement actions under the FTC Act, the treatment with physical items such as CAVs further highlights why
of minor data through the Children’s Online Privacy many laws in the US are lagging behind as it relates to
Protection Act (COPPA), and the data privacy and data privacy. Most laws on the books today relate to
information security practices of financial institutions online behavior and activity, and do not contemplate
under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley-Act (GLBA). In the the combination of internet connectivity with physical
healthcare space, data privacy and information security devices and the additional considerations of physical
is largely governed by the Health Insurance Portability safety and well-being that may come into play with
and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and its associated CAVs. For example, while some consumers may have
Privacy and Security Rules. And at the state level, the no problem sharing their personal information for safety
patchwork is even greater. Most states have their own and reliability reasons, they might hesitate if their travel
version of the FTC Act, COPPA, GLBA, and HIPAA. A data is being sold to third parties. How those factors are
number of states have specific online-privacy policy balanced (privacy v. functionality v. safety) is something
requirements for commercial websites and automatic any future state of data privacy law in the AV space will
license plate reader privacy laws. Nearly every state has need to take into account.
a data breach notification law along with some type of
The rise of IoT devices such as CAVs has also created
law requiring that personal information collected must
increased cybersecurity concerns. A Consumer
be secured in a reasonable manner. And many states
Watchdog report warned that all of the top ten
now have cybersecurity laws specific to a particular
2020 car models are vulnerable to fleet-wide hacks
industry, such as the financial sector in New York and
because of their Internet connectivity. Industry
the investment advisor/broker sector in Colorado.
professionals are warning of increased CAV security
Current federal law has little to say about the data vulnerabilities — only
10 percent of IT security
collected and used by CAVs or other IoT devices. At the professionals have high confidence in their
state level, the laws are few and far between. Michigan organization’s ability to properly secure IoT
and Nevada have AV laws that require operators
devices, according to a survey released
to provide certain privacy disclosures in external-
facing privacy notifications before releasing personal by Deloitte and Dragos. There are a number

of industry frameworks at both the international and
federal level that have been proposed for the AV sector, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR)
most notably the National Institute of Standards and
Technology’s (NIST) recently released draft standards
for IoT cybersecurity that may inform similar efforts
in the AV industry. This report, in addition to NIST’s
proposed Privacy Framework and well accepted
Cybersecurity Framework serve as potential standards
AV companies may use to measure against the growing
The Consumer Data Protection Act, sponsored by Sen.
cybersecurity threat landscape. At the state level,
Ron Wyden (D-OR), would require companies to release
California’s IoT law is the first law in the US to require
annual reports detailing privacy-protection efforts and
IoT device manufacturers to implement reasonable
to set up a “do-not-track” site where consumers can opt
security features to protect devices against threats. And
out of data collection.
although the California IoT law leaves a lot to be desired
in terms of specifics, it could represent a growing trend
in the law. How it will be enforced is still unknown.
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI)
At the federal level, there are also several data privacy

proposals that could alter the legal and regulatory
landscape. At one end of the spectrum, Sen. Marco
Rubio (R-FL) has introduced the American Data
Dissemination Act, under which the FTC would be
charged with developing and proposing new rules
relating to data privacy to Congress. This bill has Finally, the most comprehensive proposal may be the
been criticized for offering few concrete consumer Data Care Act, sponsored by Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI),
protections and for the fact that it would preempt which would give personal data protections similar to
more comprehensive state legislation, including the medical records, creating three main duties of data
CCPA. At the other end of the spectrum, congressional collectors, the “duty to care,” the “duty of loyalty,” the
Democrats have offered several proposals with stronger “duty of confidentiality,” to be enforced by FTC rules.
consumer protections.
As CAVs become increasingly operational, the focus on
AV data privacy and information security standards will
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) also likely increase. Whether federal and state law can
keep up with the rapidly evolving technological space
for IoT devices remains to be seen. Although a federal
data privacy and information security law is unlikely
in the near future, state laws such as the CCPA and
California IoT law are likely to remain as the data privacy
and information security law that will most significantly
impact the CAV industry. How robustly those state
A bill sponsored by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), would
protections will be enforced by regulators and through
require companies to rewrite service agreements, using
private rights of action remains to be seen.
“language that is clear, concise, and well-organized,”
to allow consumers to see data collected on them and
would require companies to notify consumers of any
breaches within 72 hours.

vehicle-to-vehicle, vehicle-to-infrastructure and vehicle-
to-pedestrian communication.
Spotlight To address technological advancements and the
underutilization of the 5.9 GHz band to date, the FCC
Driverless truck test in Florida approved a plan to allocate the upper 20 MHz of the
5.9 GHz band for new automotive communication
On June 16, 2019 automated truck technology technology, and specifically C-V2X, while saving the
startup Starsky Robotics completed a driverless lower 45 MHz of the band for unlicensed uses like Wi-Fi.
truck test drive on a 9.4 mile stretch of public Additionally, the FCC will seek further public input on
highway in Orlando, Florida. The vehicles was whether to allocate the remaining 10 MHz in the band
able to fully navigate roads with other vehicles to C-V2X or DSRC. The Commission voted in favor of
present, including merging onto the highway, the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at the agency’s
entering a rest area and changing lanes. December 12, 2019 open meeting.
According to FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, C-V2X would

use standard cellular protocols to provide direct
Telecommunications communications between autonomous vehicles and
other vehicles on the road, in addition to infrastructure,
and 5G cyclists, pedestrians and road workers. C-V2X is also
expected to support new, advanced applications as
Unlocking the full potential of autonomous cellular companies transition to faster, more responsive
transportation will require smart, forward-looking 5G networks. While C-V2X can technically be deployed
decisions about how to manage the spectrum on which over both 4G LTE and 5G cellular networks, the near-
driverless vehicles will rely. A vote from the Federal 20-times faster speed of 5G will ultimately allow
Communications Commission shows the United States autonomous vehicles to be able to process and react to
is preparing for a fully autonomous future. After months data in just nanoseconds. Opening the band to C-V2X
of debate, the FCC voted unanimously to propose is backed by large automakers as well as wireless
reallocating the 5.9 GHz band for both unlicensed carriers and wired broadband providers, who support
uses and transportation-specific applications, which the proposal for its commitment to both C-V2X and
would be the first step to making spectrum in this band unlicensed uses.
available for new autonomous vehicle technology.
In an effort to provide predictability for automakers and

broadband providers, the FCC voted unanimously to
initiate the process that would open up the 5.9 GHz
spectrum band for new uses. By way of background,
the agency first set aside spectrum in what is called
the 5.9 GHz band to support transportation uses in
1999. Under current FCC rules, the 5.9 GHz band is
reserved for dedicated short-range communications
(DSRC), which facilitates both vehicle-to-vehicle
and vehicle-to-infrastructure communications.
Because DSRC has been around for three decades,
some automakers and localities had begun to equip
vehicles and roadside infrastructure with DSRC-based
technologies. However, inevitably, technology has
advanced since 1999, resulting in several alternatives
to DSRC, the most noteworthy being cellular vehicle-
to-everything (C-V2X) communication that offers

Ajit Pai
Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission
"After 20 years of seeing these prime airwaves go largely unused, the
time has come for the FCC to take a fresh look at the 5.9 GHz band,”
Pai said. “DSRC has evolved slowly. It’s not widely deployed. And in the
meantime, a wave of new transportation communication technologies
has emerged.”
commonly referred to as the “C-band.” The high-band

The Department of Transportation (DOT) opposes
and mid-band spectrum coming to market both play
the proposal to allocate spectrum for unlicensed
critical roles in making 5G a reality. High-band spectrum
uses in addition to transportation. Prior to the vote, the
will facilitate fiber-like connections that will support a
FCC had held off on 5.9 GHZ spectrum rulemaking
broad range of 5G applications. Mid-band spectrum
efforts at the request of DOT Secretary Elaine Chao.
is what makes ultra-fast speeds possible. The FCC’s
The transportation agency said in a statement that
comprehensive and expeditious approach to spectrum
“the Department of Transportation has clearly stated
policy in recent months demonstrates that it is taking
in testimony and correspondence that the 75 MHz
seriously the United States’ goal to be a 5G leader.
allocated in the 5.9 GHz, what we call the ‘Safety Band,’
must be preserved for transportation safety purposes.” The United States is not alone in the pursuit of 5G
The DOT is primarily concerned with unlicensed and an enterprising spectrum policy to match. The
uses interfering with transportation communications, United States is on the cusp of building out a truly
although there is not any conclusive research that nationwide 5G system while Chinese carrier Unicom
settles the issue. has 5G coverage in 50 cities and Europe aims to have
5G connectivity in at least one major city in each EU
Next steps would involve evaluating comments from
member state.
interested stakeholders and developing final rules on
which the Commission would vote. Even if the final In regard to spectrum policy, China is currently making
rules adopted by the FCC are similar to the current the most concerted effort to push manufacturers to
proposal, it will still take years for the auto industry include C-V2X. The country set aside a dedicated
to coalesce around and implement C-V2X. As such, bandwidth on the 5.9 GHz spectrum solely for
consumers may not feel the practical implications Connected V2X use, and plans to have the technology
of this decision for years and possibly decades. rolled out across 90 percent of major cities and
Nonetheless, carving out dedicated space for C-V2X highways by 2020. Manufacturers in the US and
will give the industry the assurance it needs to invest in have been slower to move away from Dedicated-
an autonomous future. Short-Range-Communication (DSRC) technology
but the recent decision by the FCC will provide the
The FCC’s 5.9 GHz rulemaking complements several
predictability required for automotive companies to
spectrum efforts that will support the next-generation
increase investment in C-V2X. The European Parliament
networks underlying autonomous vehicle capabilities,
took a more restrictive approach to C-V2X by voting in
including 5G. In December 2019, the FCC will conduct
May 2018 to endorse DSRC in new vehicles, essentially
a public auction of high-band millimeter-wave spectrum
de-incentivize the installation of C-V2X.
(in the 37 GHz, 39 GHz, and 47 GHz bands) and the
agency’s auction of the 3.5 GHz band will begin in June Going forward, the ongoing embrace of 5G and
2020. The Commission has also proposed changes to investment in C-V2X technology will determine, in large
the rules governing the 3.1 - 3.55 GHz band to make it part, which countries lead the autonomous revolution.
available for commercial uses for the first time, and has
announced a public auction of the 3.7- 4.2 GHz band,

Contacts
GLOBAL AUTONOMOUS
VEHICLES PRACTICE
LEADER REPORT EDITOR AUSTRALIA/NEW ZEALAND
Eric J. Tanenblatt Crawford G. Schneider Ben Allen

Global Chair, Public Policy and Associate Managing Director, Partner, Sydney
Regulation Atlanta [email protected]
[email protected] [email protected] D +61 2 9035 7257
D +1 202 496 7373 D +1 404 527 8398
CANADA
Norm Emblem Gregory (Greg) Kane, Q.C. Michael F. Ledgett Jawaid Panjwani
Counsel, Toronto Counsel, Ottawa Partner, Toronto Senior Associate, Ottawa
[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
D +1 416 863 4487 D +1 613 783 9603 D +1 416 863 4793 D +1 613 783 9632
Mike (Michael) D. Schafler Karl Schober

Partner, Toronto Senior Associate, Toronto
[email protected] [email protected]
D +1 416 863 4457 D +1 416 863 483
CHINA GERMANY
Henry Chen Dr. Michael Malterer

Senior Partner, Shanghai Partner, Munich
D +86 58 785 888 D +49 8924 4408 460

UNITED KINGDOM
Martin Fanning Abbie Pokorny

Partner, London Senior Associate, London
D +44 20 7320 5582 D +44 20 7320 3940
UNITED STATES
Todd D. Daubert Ronald J. Hedges William M. Kaneko Fred W. Reinke

Partner, Washington DC Senior Counsel, New York Partner, Honolulu Partner, Washington DC
[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
D +1 202 408 6458 D +1 212 768 5387 D+1 808 524 1800 D +1 202 496 7160
Andrew Shaw Peter Z. Stockburger Lauren Wilson

Partner, Washington DC Partner, Managing Associate,
[email protected] San Diego Washington DC
D +1 202 496 7116 [email protected] [email protected]
D +1 619 595 8018 D+1 202 496 7079
Canada content compiled with the assistance of articling students: Kurtis Parcells, Sofia Skara and Noah Walters.

Global Autonomous Vehicles
Dentons’ global AV team can help you navigate the labyrinth
of national, regional and local laws, regulations and guidance
relating to the development and deployment of AVs. Whether
you are a start-up, emerging company or multinational vehicle
manufacturer, automotive OEM, vehicle or parts retailer or
driverless-technology firm; a bus, taxi, transit or truck fleet
operator; an auto liability insurer or finance company; or outside
the sector preparing for implementation of AV technology or
considering its implications for your business, we offer a full
array of tech, regulatory, transactional and litigation support.
Stay in touch
Click here to subscribe and receive updates from our
autonomous vehicles blog, The Driverless Commute,
directly to your inbox.
About The Driverless Commute

Geared to autonomous vehicles and clocking the most
important technical, legal and regulatory developments
shaping the path to full autonomy, The Driverless Commute
blog provides the latest info on pilot programs and the rapidly
evolving regulatory environment, tracks changes in public
perception of AV technology, and covers the global race to
market, including alliances between top automakers and deep-
pocketed tech giants, and cross-border partnerships.

ABOUT DENTONS
Dentons is the world's largest law firm, delivering quality and value to clients around the globe. Dentons is a leader on
the Acritas Global Elite Brand Index, a BTI Client Service 30 Award winner and recognized by prominent business and legal
publications for its innovations in client service, including founding Nextlaw Labs and the Nextlaw Global Referral Network.
Dentons' polycentric approach and world-class talent challenge the status quo to advance client interests in the communities
in which we live and work.
dentons.com
© 2020 Dentons. Dentons is a global legal practice providing client services worldwide through its member firms and affiliates.
This publication is not designed to provide legal or other advice and you should not take, or refrain from taking, action based on its content.
Please see dentons.com for Legal Notices.
CSBrand-22480-Autonomous Vehicles Report 2020_11 — 30/01/2020

Autonomous Vehicles Report 2020 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Autonomous Vehicles Report 2020 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Autonomous Vehicles Report 2020 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Global Guide to

Australia New Zealand

Canada United Kingdom

China United States

Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020 • 3

Introduction Key findings

4 • Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020

We hope that Dentons’ Global Guide to Autonomous

For more updates to help you stay connected, click

Please also be on the lookout for our Global Testing

This guide is provided for informational purposes only,

Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020 • 5

6 • Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020

Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020 • 7

8 • Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020

Road Transport Information Management

Transport for NSW

Department of Lands, Planning and the Environment

Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads

Tasmania Department of State Growth

Transport for Victoria

Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020 • 9

In November 2016, Australian

In October 2017, the NTC consulted

In October 2019, the NTC

10 • Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020

Hon Michael McCormack

Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020 • 11

Driverless vehicle testing Throughout vehicle testing, record keeping

Certain states (such as Victoria) require the application

A human driver will be required in the vehicle unless a

12 • Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020

Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020 • 13

• Organizations must take reasonable steps to

• Organizations must also take reasonable steps to

More recently, the Australian federal government

14 • Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020

16 • Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020

Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020 • 17

• The design and validation of the vehicle;

• Safety systems within the vehicle for driver accessibility; and

• Cybersecurity and data management.13

British Columbia Ontario Quebec

18 • Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020

Pilot project applications must be evaluated and accepted by the Minister.

Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020 • 19

Toronto is the first city to devote full-time staff

20 • Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020

Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020 • 21

22 • Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020

Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020 • 23

24 • Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020

Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020 • 25

Equipment in the band operates on a license-exempt

26 • Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020

28 • Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020

Global Guide to Autonomous Vehicles 2020 • 29

In April 2017, Ministry of Industry

In January 2018, National