Prospective
(1)Subsection (2) applies in circumstances where—
(a)a person suspects that a vehicle is travelling while an authorised automation feature is engaged, and
(b)assuming the vehicle was being driven by an individual, the person would have the power under an enactment (whenever passed or made) to direct the driver to stop the vehicle or act in any other way.
(2)The person may by an appropriate communication with equipment of the vehicle make any direction that could be given to a driver of the vehicle.
(3)For that purpose a communication is “appropriate” if it is a communication that equipment of the vehicle could reasonably be expected to receive and react to.
(4)In determining whether subsection (3) is satisfied, regard is to be had to—
(a)any relevant authorisation requirements or operator licensing regulations, and
(b)the design and intended function of the equipment.
(5)For the purpose of determining whether a vehicle has committed a traffic infraction, a direction made in accordance with subsection (2) has effect as if it were a direction given to a driver of the vehicle.
(6)But a vehicle with an authorised user-in-charge feature does not commit a traffic infraction by not complying with the direction if—
(a)the vehicle immediately issues a transition demand,
(b)by the end of the transition period, equipment of the vehicle communicates the substance of the direction to the user-in-charge in a way that the user-in-charge could be expected to understand, and
(c)that way of responding to the direction does not breach authorisation requirements.
(7)A direction the substance of which is communicated as described in subsection (6)(b) (and in a way that does not breach authorisation requirements) is effective against the user-in-charge as soon as—
(a)the user-in-charge assumes control of the vehicle, or
(b)(if earlier) the transition period ends,
as if it had been given to that individual as the driver.
Commencement Information
I1S. 57 not in force at Royal Assent, see s. 99(1)