Basic Questions of Tort Law from a Comparative Perspective

Askeland, Bjarte; Yamamoto, Keizô; Oliphant, Ken; Moréteau, Olivier; Menyhárd, Attila; Ludwichowska-Redo, Katarzyna; Koziol, Helmut; Green, Michael D.; Cardi, W. Jonathan

doi:10.26530/oapen_574832

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…And although there are legal mechanisms proposed to minimize these risks, such as ex-ante requirements in the recently proposed European regulatory framework for AI (European Commission, 2021), general safety standards, or ethical and socially responsible AI approaches (Cheng, Varshney, & Liu, 2021;Kim, Hooker, & Donaldson, 2021), they do not exclude the possibility of some end user or bystander being harmed. In such cases, victims should be able to seek compensation, and the most typical way to do so is on the basis of liability regimes, in particular tort law (e.g., see Chapter 8, Parts 5 and 6 by Koziol, 2015). In addition, recent advances in AI allow the degree of human intervention and supervision to become less and less, which also brings with it the need to clarify the attribution of responsibility.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Liability Regimes in the Age of AI: a Use-Case Driven Analysis of the Burden of Proof

Llorca

Charisi²,

Hamon³

et al. 2023

jair

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New emerging technologies powered by Artificial Intelligence (AI) have the potential to disruptively transform our societies for the better. In particular, data-driven learning approaches (i.e., Machine Learning (ML)) have been a true revolution in the advancement of multiple technologies in various application domains. But at the same time there is growing concern about certain intrinsic characteristics of these methodologies that carry potential risks to both safety and fundamental rights. Although there are mechanisms in the adoption process to minimize these risks (e.g., safety regulations), these do not exclude the possibility of harm occurring, and if this happens, victims should be able to seek compensation. Liability regimes will therefore play a key role in ensuring basic protection for victims using or interacting with these systems. However, the same characteristics that make AI systems inherently risky, such as lack of causality, opacity, unpredictability or their self and continuous learning capabilities, may lead to considerable difficulties when it comes to proving causation. This paper presents three case studies, as well as the methodology to reach them, that illustrate these difficulties. Specifically, we address the cases of cleaning robots, delivery drones and robots in education. The outcome of the proposed analysis suggests the need to revise liability regimes to alleviate the burden of proof on victims in cases involving AI technologies. This article appears in the AI & Society track.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Liability Regimes in the Age of AI: a Use-Case Driven Analysis of the Burden of Proof

Llorca

Charisi²,

Hamon³

et al. 2023

jair

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A Company's Right to Damages for Non-Pecuniary Loss

Wilcox¹

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Applying appropriate legal rules to companies with as much consistency and as little consternation as possible remains a challenge for legal systems. One area causing concern is the availability of damages for non-pecuniary loss to companies, a disquiet that is rooted in the very nature of such damages and of companies themselves. In this book, Vanessa Wilcox presents a detailed examination of the extent to which damages for non-pecuniary loss can be properly awarded to companies. The book focusses on the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and English law, with a chapter also dedicated to comparative treatment. While the law must be adaptable, Wilcox concludes that considerations of coherency, certainty and ultimately justice dictate that the resulting rules should conform to certain core legal principles. This book lays the foundation for further comparative research into this topic and will be of interest to both the tort law and broader legal community.

show abstract

Tort Law and the Corporation

Wilcox¹

2016

A Company's Right to Damages for Non-Pecuniary Loss

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Basic Questions of Tort Law from a Comparative Perspective

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Liability Regimes in the Age of AI: a Use-Case Driven Analysis of the Burden of Proof

Liability Regimes in the Age of AI: a Use-Case Driven Analysis of the Burden of Proof

A Company's Right to Damages for Non-Pecuniary Loss

Tort Law and the Corporation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About