In recent years the development of autonomous vehicles such as cars, drones and vessels are reshaping the world. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) defines Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships as vessels that can operate without human interaction, with varying degrees of autonomy.
Hull & Machinery losses are often claimed to fall within the scope of “negligence of Masters, Officers, Crew or Pilots”. The development of autonomous vessels will inevitably lead to changes in these claims and, therefore, blame must be reconsidered.
There are different methodologies to measure the type and degree of autonomy. From a legal point of view, I like the classification between remotely controlled ships with seafarers on board and remotely controlled ships without seafarers on board. The presence of people on board the ship is a crucial factor in terms of liability. A possible test will be to ask if human interaction on board would have changed the outcome. This is in terms of operational control because the crew will no longer need to be “on board”, as these vessels will be operated from shore in different scenarios.
Ultimately, technology will dictate the multiple degrees of autonomy and must be examined individually to determine which party was at fault regarding litigation or arbitration.
The gradual shift towards automation is transforming the industry, and these changes provide better safety measures and efficiency to the industry, diminishing the risk.
A new standard contract is needed in order for autonomous ships to operate within the shipping industry. Law and marine insurance are, in general, forced to follow the world’s social and business realities and the shipping industry in particular. As such, we now see the first drafts being adopted. AUTOSHIPMAN is the first standard agreement specifically produced for the growing autonomous market.
The cyber security and force majeure clauses, which limit the parties’ liability if certain events make it challenging to meet the obligations under the contract, have now been revised. This will introduce cyber security standards and even certifications that must be followed to minimise liability.
However, this point will still be argued.
Considerable work is still needed before insurance practices for autonomous vessels can be adopted. This will include drafting new documents and, after testing, revising and editing before they can be added to an insurance policy application.
But, overall, the risk of human error will decrease. The autonomous vessels’ discussion regarding liability and who is liable for losses regarding medium and complex losses is ongoing. Liable parties may range from software developers to shipyards and certification companies, and disclosing liability to them may be easier in future.
As in many cases, the more parties involved in the operation of ships, the higher the risk and the greater number of participants be deemed liable for losses incurred. Of course, all of the roles will have to be examined.
