Automated vehicles and Australian personal injury compensation schemes
View/ Open
File version
Version of Record (VoR)
Author(s)
Brady, Mark
Burns, Kylie
Leiman, Tania
Tranter, Kieran
Year published
2017
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
This article argues that the existing regimes in Australia dealing with
rehabilitation and compensation for injury and death arising from road
trauma — the compulsory third party motor accident schemes and the
national injury insurance schemes — will require reform to accommodate the
adoption of automated vehicles on public roads. It suggests that victims
injured by automated vehicles should not suffer differential entitlement to
compensation or be arbitrarily excluded from the various schemes as a
result of outmoded and narrow definitions or by the inability to establish
‘fault’ where a vehicle is highly automated. It argues ...
View more >This article argues that the existing regimes in Australia dealing with rehabilitation and compensation for injury and death arising from road trauma — the compulsory third party motor accident schemes and the national injury insurance schemes — will require reform to accommodate the adoption of automated vehicles on public roads. It suggests that victims injured by automated vehicles should not suffer differential entitlement to compensation or be arbitrarily excluded from the various schemes as a result of outmoded and narrow definitions or by the inability to establish ‘fault’ where a vehicle is highly automated. It argues that to ensure continuous coverage of the schemes there will need to be reforms to the threshold definitions of accident/personal injury. It further contends that the current fault-based systems may no longer remain a viable pathway for attributing liability in an accident involving highly automated vehicles and require reform.
View less >
View more >This article argues that the existing regimes in Australia dealing with rehabilitation and compensation for injury and death arising from road trauma — the compulsory third party motor accident schemes and the national injury insurance schemes — will require reform to accommodate the adoption of automated vehicles on public roads. It suggests that victims injured by automated vehicles should not suffer differential entitlement to compensation or be arbitrarily excluded from the various schemes as a result of outmoded and narrow definitions or by the inability to establish ‘fault’ where a vehicle is highly automated. It argues that to ensure continuous coverage of the schemes there will need to be reforms to the threshold definitions of accident/personal injury. It further contends that the current fault-based systems may no longer remain a viable pathway for attributing liability in an accident involving highly automated vehicles and require reform.
View less >
Journal Title
Torts Law Journal
Volume
24
Copyright Statement
© 2017 Lexis Nexis Australia. The attached file is reproduced here in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the journal website for access to the definitive, published version.
Subject
Tort Law
Law