By placing legal responsibility on the driver, the aim is to reduce overdependence and misuse of ADAS systems
In a landmark judgement, China’s Supreme People’s Court (SPC) has ruled that the human driver will be responsible for all outcomes while driving. This ruling covers cars that come with L1 or L2 ADAS systems. The court has ruled that the human driver is the primary operator. ADAS systems cannot be considered a replacement under the law. Let’s check out more details on these developments.
ADAS overdependence, use of cheat devices
China’s top court’s ruling comes in response to various cases where users were found to be misusing the ADAS systems. In one such sensational case, an intoxicated driver in Zhejiang province had given full control to the car’s ADAS systems. He had used an aftermarket cheating device that tricked the ADAS system into believing that the driver had their hands on the steering wheel. The car eventually stopped in the middle of the road, blocking traffic. The driver was found sleeping in the passenger seat.
As per the court’s judgement, the driver was held responsible for the lapse. He was charged with dangerous driving and sentenced to over a month in detention. A fine was also imposed on the driver. This verdict applies to all other similar cases, as part of a broader safety crackdown against overdependence and misuse of ADAS systems.
Cases have been reported where the human driver was busy with their phones after they had activated ADAS features. The court ruling also covers incidents where the human driver may have failed to keep their eyes on the road. The legal ramifications can be even more severe in case the driver was found to be using cheat devices to trick the ADAS system. The verdict will also help prevent ADAS systems from being confused with fully autonomous driving systems.
Focus on improving safety of road users
China’s top court’s ruling comes at a time when several other decisions have been taken to improve road safety. For context, a ban has been placed on retractable door handles and yoke steering wheels. Similarly, NCAP protocols are being revised in favour of physical buttons. The court verdict will also restrict questionable marketing strategies where ADAS systems are being positioned as “self-driving”. Such tactics can create a false impression and lead to overreliance or misuse of ADAS systems.
With the human driver held liable for the legal consequences, a clear safety barrier has been established between L1/L2 ADAS systems and L3/L4/L5 vehicles. In the case of L3 vehicles in China, the driver can legally take their eyes off the road in specific situations. However, they can still be held responsible if they were in charge of the vehicle at the time of the accident. If the system itself has failed in some way, the manufacturer will usually be the one to bear the liability.
Rules are completely different for L4-L5 vehicles, which are truly driverless. If something bad happens, the liability is shared by the fleet operator or the manufacturer. China’s top court ruling seems effective in preventing overdependence and misuse of ADAS systems, without impacting the future of fully autonomous tech.
