On a certain day in July 2024, Baidu's autonomous driving ride-hailing service platform "Luobo Kuaipao" experienced a traffic accident in Wuhan, where an autonomous taxi collided slightly with a pedestrian. This incident sparked widespread public discussion about the safety of autonomous vehicles and the allocation of accident liability. This issue will examine the "Luobo Kuaipao" incident to explore how responsibility should be allocated when autonomous vehicles are involved in accidents.

I. Hot Topic Review

When the "Luobo Kuaipao" accident occurred, the vehicle started when the green light was on, while the pedestrian crossed the road against a red light. After preliminary examination, the pedestrian showed no obvious signs of injury, but for safety reasons, they remained in the hospital for further observation and treatment. Baidu quickly responded, stating that it would fully cooperate with the traffic police department's investigation and actively assume corresponding responsibilities. At the same time, Baidu emphasized the potential and value of autonomous driving technology in improving road safety.

II. Legal Norms Related to Autonomous Driving Technology

The traffic accident involving "Luobo Kuaipao" has once again raised doubts about the safety of autonomous driving technology. With the development of autonomous driving technology, how should accident liability be reasonably allocated among multiple parties involved, namely vehicle owners, managers, autonomous driving system developers, and insurance companies?

According to our research, China has introduced a series of regulations to promote the development of the autonomous driving industry. However, there is currently no unified and clear legal provision. The following table is only an incomplete statistics.

Among them, regarding the attribution of traffic accident liability, the Implementation Guidelines for Market Access and Road Passage Pilot of Intelligent Connected Vehicles (Trial) provide relatively detailed and specific provisions, explicitly stating: "In case of a road traffic accident when the autonomous driving system function is not activated, liability shall be determined in accordance with current regulations; in case of a traffic accident when the autonomous driving system is activated, the insurance company shall provide compensation within the limit of insurance liability, and for any insufficient amount, the liability compensation of the parties shall be determined in accordance with the provisions of Article 76 of the Road Traffic Safety Law of the People's Republic of China. If the intelligent connected vehicle is liable for compensation according to law, the pilot user entity shall bear the compensation liability; if the pilot automobile production enterprise, autonomous driving system development unit, infrastructure and equipment provider, safety officer, and other related parties are found to have faults in the traffic accident, the pilot user entity may recover compensation according to law. If a crime is constituted, the criminal liability of the relevant responsible persons shall be investigated in accordance with the law."

Additionally, the Regulations on Intelligent Connected Vehicles of Shenzhen Special Economic Zone also specifically point out that if an accident occurs when the autonomous driving system is activated, the vehicle owner or manager bears primary responsibility and may seek recourse from developers or manufacturers. The same logic applies to other local legislation, such as the Regulations on Road Traffic Safety of Jiangsu Province and the Regulations on Promoting Innovation Application of Driverless Intelligent Connected Vehicles in Shanghai Pudong New Area. According to Article 29 of the Regulations on Promoting Innovation Application of Driverless Intelligent Connected Vehicles in Shanghai Pudong New Area, if a driverless intelligent connected vehicle is involved in a traffic accident during its innovative application period, the traffic management department of the public security organ shall determine liability in accordance with relevant laws and regulations. If the intelligent connected vehicle should bear liability according to law, the enterprise to which it belongs shall make advance compensation, and may subsequently seek recourse from the autonomous driving system developer, automobile manufacturer, or equipment provider who bears responsibility. If compulsory traffic accident liability insurance or commercial insurance has been purchased, it shall be handled in accordance with relevant regulations. Additionally, data collected by driverless intelligent connected vehicles and the vehicle-road collaborative cloud control platform may, after being verified by the traffic management department of the public security organ, serve as the basis for determining traffic violations and traffic accident liability.

Generally speaking, the overall approach of current relevant regulations is to "determine the liability of the parties" in accordance with current laws. In the non-activated state, liability is determined in accordance with current regulations. In case of a traffic accident when the autonomous driving system is activated, if compulsory traffic accident liability insurance and commercial insurance have been purchased, it shall be handled in accordance with relevant regulations. If compensation is insufficient, the vehicle owner or manager shall bear primary responsibility, and after bearing primary responsibility, the vehicle owner or manager may seek recourse from developers or manufacturers based on actual fault conditions.

III. Case Analysis and Liability Allocation

In this "Luobo Kuaipao" accident, the main issue involves the allocation of responsibility in the civil domain, and the proportion of liability is still determined according to the above-mentioned "determination of party liability."

Pedestrian Liability: The pedestrian crossed against a red light. According to the Road Traffic Safety Law of the People's Republic of China, the pedestrian should bear primary responsibility. However, according to Article 76 of that law, even if the motor vehicle party has no fault, it must bear no more than 10% of the compensation liability, unless the accident was caused by the pedestrian intentionally.

Autonomous Vehicle Liability: According to relevant regulations such as the Implementation Guidelines for Market Access and Road Passage Pilot of Intelligent Connected Vehicles (Trial), the Regulations on Intelligent Connected Vehicles of Shenzhen Special Economic Zone, the Regulations on Road Traffic Safety of Jiangsu Province, and the Regulations on Promoting Innovation Application of Driverless Intelligent Connected Vehicles in Shanghai Pudong New Area, for autonomous vehicles such as "Luobo Kuaipao," in case of a traffic accident, if the autonomous driving system has not been activated, liability determination shall be conducted in accordance with regulations; if the autonomous driving system has been activated and compulsory traffic accident liability insurance and commercial insurance have been purchased, it shall be handled in accordance with relevant regulations. If compensation is insufficient, the vehicle owner or manager shall bear primary responsibility, and after bearing primary responsibility, the vehicle owner or manager may seek recourse from developers or manufacturers based on actual fault conditions.

IV. Conclusion

The "Luobo Kuaipao" incident reminds us once again that in today's rapid development of autonomous driving technology, we should still implement the principle of "putting safety first" to the end. Only by closely integrating technology with law can we truly achieve the safety and popularization of autonomous driving technology, bringing more convenient and safe travel experience to the public.