Automated Vehicles Act 2024

Policy background

Policy development

1. The Law Commissions’ review of the law relating to automated vehicles involved three rounds of consultation between November 2018 and December 2020, involving over 350 meetings with individuals and organisations, and analysis of over 400 written responses. The Law Commissions published their report Automated Vehicles: joint report with 75 recommendations in January 2022. 1
2. The Government’s response to the recommendations was published in the Connected and Automated Mobility 2025: Realising the benefits of self-driving vehicles in the UK (CAM 2025) in August 2022. 2 Based on the Law Commissions’ recommendations, CAM 2025 committed to set out a legal and safety framework to provide clarity of responsibility for self-driving vehicles and to put in place new safety requirements. The framework applies to vehicle systems that are capable of driving a vehicle, for some or all of a journey, with no human input. Such systems are considered ‘self-driving’, and legal responsibilities change. This technology is distinct from technology that supports a driver (driver assistance technology), where the driver remains responsible at all times. The Law Commissions recommended that it should be a criminal offence to market a vehicle as self-driving if it does not meet the legal definition.
3. As recommended by the Law Commissions, CAM 2025 identifies new legal entities responsible for the safety of self-driving systems and creates a new legal status for a driver who has handed control of a vehicle to a self-driving system. It also sets out details of a new safety framework for self-driving vehicles on roads in Great Britain.
4. The safety framework includes a high-level non-statutory safety ambition which aims to provide a focus for Government and industry as self-driving vehicles are developed and deployed, and to provide a publicly-accessible aim to support public acceptance. A set of National Safety Principles, referred to as a Statement of Safety Principles in the Act, must set out further detail of the safety expectations for self-driving vehicles and to which the Secretary of State is required to have regard when assessing whether a vehicle is able to drive itself safely and legally. The Statement of Safety Principles are required to be framed with a view to securing the safety ambition that authorised automated vehicles will achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or higher than, that of careful and competent human drivers.
5. Vehicles with automated systems will be subject to detailed technical assessment and approval for the purposes of safety and cyber-security using the well-established Vehicle Type Approval process. Amendments to the approval process can be made where necessary to account for new automated technologies. A vehicle with automated technology may be put forward for authorisation, which is the process by which a system will be assessed as self-driving. If assessed as self-driving, authorisation identifies the organisation responsible for the system.
6. If an authorised self-driving system operates without a responsible individual inside at any point, it requires a licensed operator to oversee the service. If the service carries passengers, it requires a permit for automated passenger services or license to do so under taxi, private hire or public service vehicle laws.
7. An in-use regulatory scheme holds those responsible for self-driving systems to account while the systems are in use, and sanctions and penalties apply if the regulated bodies fail to meet their obligations. No-blame safety investigations by inspectors of automated vehicle incidents make recommendations to inform and shape the ongoing safe development and deployment of self-driving vehicles.
8. In addition to the Law Commission’s recommendations, the Act enables information about traffic regulation orders (TROs) to be made available digitally and in a common format for use in self-driving vehicles and other systems that facilitate driving vehicles on a road. The data, which includes, for example, speed limits, road closures and restrictions, location and times of use of bus lanes and parking bays can then be used to create a digital map of the road network which support the safe operation of self-driving vehicles. The proposal for digital TROs was consulted on in 2022. 3
9. The following paragraphs provide further detail on the policy background, following the structure of the Act.

Part 1 and Schedules 1 and 2: Establishing a regulatory scheme for automated vehicles

Chapter 1: Authorisation of road vehicles for automated use

1. Chapter 1 sets out the basic concepts and safety expectations, and establishes a regulatory scheme for a vehicle to be authorised in Great Britain as "self-driving".
2. For conventional vehicles it is the responsibility of the driver to follow the rules of the road. So, even when using driver assistance systems, the driver must always monitor the driving of the vehicle and be ready to intervene. Chapter 1 sets out the "self-driving test" which identifies, in law, those systems (known as "features") that are sufficiently technologically advanced that there does not need to be an individual in the driving seat monitoring the road and behaviour of the vehicle. Legal responsibility for self-driving vehicles shifts away from the human user of the vehicle.
3. Authorisation is the process by which the Secretary of State will determine whether a vehicle meets the self-driving test and other regulatory requirements. Authorisation considers whether a vehicle can safely and legally drive itself without the need for monitoring or control by an individual.
4. Each authorised automated vehicle must have an authorised self-driving entity (ASDE) who is responsible for the way that the vehicle drives and for meeting other regulatory obligations. The identity of the ASDE for each authorised automated vehicle will be published on a register. The ASDE must appoint a nominated manager who is responsible for providing information that regulators require The ASDE may be subject to regulatory sanctions if an automated vehicle commits a traffic infraction or if regulatory requirements have not been met.
5. The Law Commissions also recommended that the Secretary of State for Transport be required in law to publish safety principles against which the safety of automated vehicles can be measured. The Act refers to this standard as a ‘Statement of Safety Principles’ (see section 2) and requires the Secretary of State to consult on and define the Safety Principles in a statement laid before Parliament. The Safety Principles set out the safety expectations for self-driving vehicles and the Secretary of State is required to have regard to the Safety Principles in their assessment during the authorisation process of whether a vehicle meets the self-driving test under section 1. The power to authorise cannot be exercised until the Statement of Safety Principles has effect.

Chapter 2: Licensing of operators for vehicle use without user-in-charge

1. Chapter 2 is concerned with ‘no-user-in-charge’ (NUiC) vehicles. Some self-driving features do not require an individual to be in the vehicle, and in a position to exercise control of the vehicle at any point in the journey (a 'user-in-charge') and such features are therefore referred to as a NUiC features. For example, a vehicle with a NUiC feature could travel empty or with only freight or passengers (no responsible human needed inside the vehicle).
2. As is required for all self-driving vehicles, these vehicles must have an authorised self-driving entity (responsible for the way the vehicle drives), but are also required to be overseen by a licensed NUiC operator. The licensed operator is required to have "oversight" of the vehicle. This involves knowing where its vehicles are, maintenance and insurance and general responsibility for safe operations. This role is, in some respects, similar to a bus operator.
3. The Act therefore provides for the establishment of an operator licensing scheme to ensure that companies operating self-driving vehicles are subject to set requirements and are suitable for the role.

Chapter 3: Provision of information by regulated bodies

1. Safety assurance relies heavily on information provided by the ASDE and NUiC operator to the regulator, both in their safety cases and in subsequent submissions. Chapter 3 makes provision for the sharing of information by ASDE/NUiC operators with the Secretary of State and others.
2. The functioning of the safety framework relies on good quality information being provided. The Law Commissions found existing offences such as corporate manslaughter, fraud and Health and Safety offences left gaps, and new offences were necessary. The process would be undermined by any lack of candour. The provisions therefore put in place specific criminal offences for misrepresentations and non-disclosure that have implications for vehicle safety.

Chapter 4: Powers to investigate premises used by regulated bodies

1. Chapter 4 gives various powers to investigate premises used by bodies regulated under this Act. The provisions in this Chapter are in response to the Law Commissions’ recommendation that the in-use regulator should have powers to apply for a search warrant to obtain information which is relevant to an investigation and powers to inspect remote operation centres.

Chapter 5: Civil sanctions against regulated bodies

1. Chapter 5 provides for a range of civil sanctions against bodies regulated under the Act if they fail to comply with, amongst other things, authorisation requirements or information obligations. The provisions in this Chapter are in response to the Law Commissions’ recommendation that the in-use regulator should have statutory powers to impose the following regulatory sanctions: civil penalties; redress orders; compliance orders.

Chapter 6: Other regulatory powers and duties

1. Chapter 6 sets out the Secretary of State’s regulatory duties to monitor the performance of authorised automated vehicles and ensuring that the safety of the vehicles is consistent with the Statement of Safety Principles. The Secretary of State will issue annual monitoring reports. This Chapter sets out powers to investigate relevant incidents.

Chapter 7: Supplementary provision

1. Chapter 7 makes supplementary provisions for the purposes of Part 1 covering matters such as the subsequent use of information obtained under powers given by this Part.

Schedule 1: Enforcement action under Part 1: procedure

1. Schedule 1 sets out the procedures for exercising the power to suspend or vary authorisations, as well as for issuing certain types of notices and penalties under Part 1.

Schedule 2: Amendments related to Part 1

1. Schedule 2 makes various consequential amendments to existing provisions.

Part 2 and Schedule 3: Criminal liability for vehicle use

Chapter 1: Legal position of the user in charge

1. Chapter 1 provides that, in certain circumstances where an authorised automated feature is engaged, an individual in the vehicle and in a position to operate the driving controls (referred to as a "user-in-charge", or UiC) may claim an immunity for offences arising from the way the vehicle is driven.
2. If a self-driving feature requires a responsible human inside the vehicle (e.g. because it can only complete part of a journey such as for a motorway chauffeur system), that human is the driver while the feature is disengaged and becomes a UiC when the self-driving feature is engaged. The UiC is not responsible for the way the self-driving vehicle drives when the feature is engaged.
3. The UiC must however be qualified and fit to drive, and in a position to exercise control. The UiC also retains responsibilities not associated with dynamically controlling the vehicle and may be called on to take over driving if the self-driving feature issues a transition demand – and may have to drive for part of the journey to reach their destination.
4. While the self-driving feature is engaged, the UiC is not responsible for dynamic driving. They do not control the vehicle through steering, accelerating or braking, and do not need to monitor the driving environment. They have express immunity from the most serious road traffic offences (subsections 1 to 3A of the Road Traffic Act 1988). They are not responsible for signals and lighting. The immunity ensures that the user-in-charge cannot be held liable for criminal offences which arise from self-driving activities.
5. However, a UiC does retain other driver responsibilities not linked to the manner of driving. For example, to ensure that the vehicle has appropriate insurance, check that any load is secure, ensure roadworthiness, and ensure that any children in the vehicle are wearing their seatbelts. Other examples of UiC responsibilities in the chapter include offences relating to parking, and payment of tolls and charges.
6. A UiC should remain able to retake dynamic driving control, for example they must be awake and in the driving seat. Mobile phone use remains prohibited.

Chapter 2: Offences

1. Chapter 2 sets out new driving offences relating to automated vehicles and amends offences in the Road Traffic Act 1988 to apply to circumstances arising from the use of automated vehicles.
2. With automation there is likely to be a large dependency on software which was not adequately reflected in previous legislation. The Act therefore makes amendments to bring software within existing offences under the Road Traffic Act 1988 around tampering, and the fitting and supply of defective or unsuitable parts. 

Schedule 3: Amendments related to section 54

1. Schedule 3 amends legislation in connection with the new offences.

Part 3 and Schedule 4: Policing and investigation

Chapter 1: Stopping and seizure

1. Chapter 1 makes provision to enable stopping powers to be exercised against automated vehicles, and makes provision in respect of the seizure and detention of vehicles.

Chapter 2: Investigation of incidents by statutory inspectors

1. Chapter 2 makes provision for the appointment of inspectors of automated vehicle incidents for the purpose of carrying out safety investigations. Such investigations are to increase understanding of and reduce the risks of harm from the use of automated vehicles and not to establish blame or liability. Further provision under this Chapter is concerned with giving inspectors powers to obtain and gather evidence and also with the subsequent use of information, contents of safety reports and procedural matters.
2. This is distinct from the in-use regulatory function, the purpose of which is to monitor and enforce regulatory standards. The regulatory function will look at how and why an automated vehicle has committed a traffic infraction, and whether it is appropriate to issue regulatory sanctions. The safety investigations conducted by statutory inspectors does not establish blame or liability, nor issue sanctions, but rather publishes non-binding recommendations. This is because the purpose of a statutory inspector is to identify, improve the understanding of, and reduce the risk of automated vehicle incidents through conducting a safety investigation.
3. These powers fulfil the recommendation from the Law Commissions that an independent collision investigation unit should be given responsibility for investigating serious, complex and high-profile collisions involving automated vehicles.

Schedule 4: Amendments related to section 66(3)

1. Schedule 4 makes amendments to the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 to provide for the offence of failing to comply with an inspector’s direction under section 66(3).

Part 4 and Schedule 5: Marketing restrictions

1. A driver in a vehicle with assistance technology who believes the vehicle is capable of driving itself could over-rely on the vehicle and disengage from the driving task when it is not safe to do so. Therefore, Part 4 of the Act creates (and makes further provision in relation to) offences to ensure that only authorised automated vehicles are marketed using words or symbols reserved only for authorised automated vehicles, and to ensure that vehicles that only provide driver assistance (and hence are not authorised automated vehicles) are not marketed in a way that could confuse the driving public into believing they do not need to pay attention to the road. The offences only apply to people acting in the course of business and if the use of the restricted term or confusing communication is directed at end-users.
2. Schedule 5 requires the Secretary of State to enforce misleading marketing provisions and grants powers in Part 3 of Schedule 5 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 for that purpose.
3. Part 4 and Schedule 5 implement the Law Commissions’ recommendation that it should be a criminal offence to market a vehicle as self-driving if it is not authorised as such.

Part 5 and Schedule 6: Permits for automated passenger services

1. Part 5 and Schedule 6 of the Act make provision in respect of the licensing of automated passenger services, the disapplication of taxi, private hire and bus legislation to licensed automated passenger service providers as long as they remain in the area in which, and in a vehicle in which, services can be provided under the permit. Permits may be granted subject to conditions. It also sets out the requirements that must be satisfied before a permit is granted.
2. Schedule 6 provides that infringement of obligations the permit holder must fulfil as a condition of holding the permit can be enforced by compliance notices, monetary penalties and costs notices and provides for rights of appeal.

Part 6: Adaptation of existing regimes

1. Part 6 of the Act makes provision for the adaptation of existing regimes. Such provision includes, for example, the power to amend the type-approval framework in assimilated legislation to make it more suitable for automated vehicles, the modification of roadside testing and inspection powers for the purpose of ascertaining whether requirements under this Act are satisfied, and a power to require that traffic regulation orders are provided in digital form so that they may be used by self-driving vehicles.

Type approval

1. The process for checking that vehicles, their systems and their components comply with applicable safety and environmental standards is a well-established process for conventional vehicles (known as Vehicle Type Approval). Many of the requirements that apply in GB Type Approval are set at an international level at the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), which provides harmonisation of vehicle standards, meaning a manufacturer can be approved once for access to multiple markets. Where UNECE standards are not in place, Great British standards can be developed.
2. The Law Commissions recommended that the Secretary of State should establish a domestic self-driving vehicle technical approval scheme to approve vehicles with self-driving features which do not have UNECE approvals and which are intended for use on Great British roads.
3. Type approval differs from the authorisation stage in Part 1 as the approval process is needed to register a vehicle with the Driver Vehicle and Licensing Agency based on it meeting specific technical requirements, whereas authorisation determines whether a vehicle meets the self-driving test and, therefore, whether legal responsibilities change.
4. The Act grants power to the Secretary of State to amend the assimilated type approval frameworks. This is to ensure that type approval can be issued for self-driving vehicles which do not, for example, have a driver's seat or driver's controls. These amendments to requirements, include for example vehicle categories and definitions..
5. Specific technical provisions are also required for the automated driving system (responsible for controlling the automated vehicle) and amendments can include ongoing obligations in order to ensure the continued on-road safety of self-driving vehicles. For example, changes in traffic rules or the emergence of new cyber-security vulnerabilities may require the manufacturer to take action such as issuing software updates.
6. The power also enables the Secretary of State to set requirements for manufacturers to have in place appropriate management systems covering safety, security, and software updates for vehicles. Management systems are frameworks consisting of the manufacturer’s policies, processes, documentation, standards, toolsets and competencies of personnel which cover the activities around the safety and security of a vehicle throughout its life.

Digitalising Traffic Regulation Orders

1. Self-driving vehicles need to have an accurate and up-to-date understanding of the road, and to know the legal parameters of the network. Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) hold much of the necessary information to facilitate this, for example, information on speed limits, parking bays, bus lanes and road works. TROs are issued and held by traffic regulation authorities and traditionally stored on paper or in separate authority systems, and the format and content of TROs can differ between each authority. The information may therefore not be readily available to those developing or deploying self-driving vehicles.
2. In order to facilitate access to the information, the Act gives the Secretary of State or Welsh Ministers the power to make regulations to require TRO information to be provided by traffic regulation authorities in England or Wales respectively, to specify where and when it is sent, and that it must be provided in line with specified electronic data standards.
3. The Act allows for the Government to publish this information via a common publication platform so that it can be used by self-driving vehicles and by other electronic equipment designed to undertake or facilitate the driving of vehicles on a road for example, satellite navigation applications and features.

Part 7: General provision

1. Part 7 of the Act makes general provision concerned with matters such as the application of data protection legislation, Crown application, the procedure for making regulations under the Act, and extent.