Research and development in private law

Research and development in private law

Civil Liability Arising from Collisions Involving Unmanned Ships

Articles in Press

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Mahsa Bahadoran-Baghbaderani
Masoud Shirani
Reza Soltani
Department of Law, Na.C., Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran
10.22034/jpl.2025.2068252.1229
Abstract
The emergence of unmanned ships has fundamentally reshaped the legal architecture governing civil liability in maritime collisions. While the removal of human navigators promises a reduction in conventional human error, reliance on complex computational systems, algorithmic decision-making, and remote-control infrastructures has generated new uncertainty regarding the attribution of legal responsibility. In this evolving setting, although the traditional role of the shipowner remains partially intact, established doctrines such as captain’s fault or crew negligence no longer reflect the operational reality of autonomous maritime systems. Accordingly, the legal status and potential liability of remote operators and artificial intelligence developers require renewed doctrinal interpretation and regulatory refinement.

This study, employing a descriptive–analytical methodology and examining the compatibility of Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS) with the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREGs), proposes two differentiated models aligned with the vessel’s level of autonomy. For remotely controlled vessels, a Dynamic Liability Framework is advanced, in which liability is distributed according to the decision point and allocated sequentially among the shipowner, remote operator, and AI developer. Conversely, for fully autonomous vessels, Strict Liability with Right of Recourse is identified as the more appropriate model: the shipowner remains strictly liable toward third parties but may recover losses from the AI developer where a software defect, cyber vulnerability, or algorithmic malfunction can be demonstrated. Together, these models seek to balance effective victim protection with the maintenance of innovation incentives in the autonomous maritime sector.

The research ultimately concludes that traditional fault-based regimes are structurally inadequate for addressing the distributed and data-driven nature of decision-making in unmanned navigation. Ensuring legal fairness in the autonomous era requires a reconceptualization of foundational maritime doctrines—including the definition of the “responsible actor”—in light of algorithmic agency and system-based liability. Future reform should include competency standards for remote operators, certification schemes for maritime AI developers, expanded P&I coverage addressing cyber and algorithmic risks, and regional or international technological compensation funds. Only through such coordinated legal and institutional adaptation can maritime law effectively govern liability in the era of unmanned navigation.
Keywords
Unmanned Ships
Civil Liability
Maritime Collision
Regulatory Reform
Dynamic Liability Framework
Strict Liability with Right of Recourse
COLREGs
Subjects
1.       Abuata, M. (2014). Civil Liability Arising from Ship Collisions (1st ed.). Majd Publications. (in Persian)
2.       Asgari, A., & Hosseini, S. H. (2014). The shipowner’s liability and its insurance regime. International Legal Research, 7(23), 131–156. https://sanad.iau.ir/Journal/alr/Article/1059573. (in Persian)
3.       Basnet, S., BahooToroody, A., Bolbot, V., & Banda, O. V. (2023). Real-time risk monitoring of ship pilotage operations: Automating BN risk model development. In European Safety and Reliability Conference (pp. 1250-1257). Research Publishing Services.
4.       Bird & Bird. (2025). AI as a digital asset: Civil liability regime for AI. Retrieved from https://www.twobirds.com/en/capabilities/practices/digital-rights-and-assets/european-digital-strategy-developments/ai-as-a-digital-asset/ai-as-a-digital-asset/civil-liability-regime-for-ai
5.       Blanke, M., Henriques, M., & Bang, J. (2017). A pre-analysis on autonomous ships. DTU. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/A-pre-analysis-on-autonomous-ships-Summary/4eabcca691a52956f697f560dca3c1ce942781d8. Accessed 20 March 2020.
6.       Calabresi, G. (1970). The costs of accidents: A legal and economic analysis. Yale University Press
7.       Calabresi, G. (1970). The costs of accidents: A legal and economic analysis. Yale University Press
8.       Carey, L. (2017). All hands off deck? The legal barriers to autonomous ships. NUS Centre for Maritime Law (Working Paper 17/06 NUS, Working Paper 2017/011 NUS).
9.       Comité Maritime International (CMI). (2018). CMI International Working Group Position Paper on Unmanned Ships and the International Regulatory Framework. https://comitemaritime.org/wp-content/uplo ads/2018/05/CMI-Position-Paper-on-Unmanned-Ships.pdf
10.    Comité Maritime International CMI. (2016). CMI International working group position paper on unmanned ships and the international regulatory framework
11.    Cornu, G. (Ed.). (1996). Vocabulaire juridique. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France
12.    Crewtoo: The Home of Seafarers Online. (n.d.). A new look at what causes accidents at sea? http://www.crewtoo.com/crew-life/rules-regs/what-causes-accidents/. Accessed 30 July 2019.
13.    Dehkhoda, A.A. (1998). The Dictionary [of Persian] (2nd ed, by Mohammad Moin and Jafar Shahidi). Tehran University Press. (in Persian)
14.    Deketelaere, P. (2016–2017). The legal challenges of unmanned vessels (Unpublished Master dissertation, Universiteit Gent, Belgium).
15.    Demirel, E., & Bayer, D. (2015). Further studies on the COLREGs (collision regulations). TransNav: International Journal of Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, 9, 17–22. https://doi.org/10.12716/1001.09.01.02
16.    Directive (EU) 2024/2853 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2024 on liability for defective products and repealing Council Directive 85/374/EEC. Official Journal of the European Union, L (2024), OJ L 2024/2853.
17.    Gard AS. (2024). Gard Rules 2024 for Ships. Retrieved November 12, 2024, from https://assets.ctfassets.net/dm3vx1xfnqvh/s35xl34eA6djSnMdzWPy8/9dd1ad0ec55a463c0ca6b87664a8c033/Rules_2024_for_ships.pdf
18.    Gürses, Ö. (2023). Marine insurance law (3rd ed.). Routledge
19.    Hacker, P. (2024). Proposal for a directive on adapting non-contractual civil liability rules to artificial intelligence: Complementary impact assessment.
20.    Hare, J. (2009). Shipping law & admiralty jurisdiction in South Africa (2nd ed.). Cape Town: Juta.
21.    Hill, C. (2003). Maritime law (6th ed.). London: Informa Law.
22.    International Group of P&I Clubs. (2024). About the International Group of P&I Clubs. Retrieved from https://www.igpandi.org/article/about/
23.    International Maritime Organization. (2024, April 22–26). Report of the 111th session of the Legal Committee (LEG 111). London: IMO.
24.    Japan’s Ministry of Land, Industry, Transport and Tourism (MLIT). (2021). The Nippon Foundation MEGURI2040. Available online: https://www.nippon-foundation.or.jp/en/what/projects/meguri2040 (accessed on 30 December 2024).
25.    Jassal, R. (2016, June 28). 8 COLREG rules every navigating officer must understand. My Sea Time. https://www.myseatime.com/blog/detail/8-colreg-rules-every-navigating-officer-must-understand. Accessed 18 April 2019.
26.    Johansen, T. A., Perez, T., & Cristofaro, A. (2016). Ship collision avoidance and COLREGS compliance using simulation-based control behaviour selection with predictive hazard assessment. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 17(12), 1–16.
27.    Kazemi, S. (2017). Virtual spaces or realistic dreams. Behangam: Scientific and Specialized Quarterly on Maritime Studies, 10(34), 1–47. (in Persian)
28.    Kazemi,M. (2025). The impact of technological growth on civil liability (Tort Law) (Transformation from the debt of responsibility to the demand for compensation). Research and development in private law, 2(3), 311-344. doi: 10.22034/jpl.2025.721256. (in Persian)
29.    Kim, H. (2022). Historical sketch of artificial intelligence. In Artificial intelligence for 6G (pp. 3-14). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
30.    Lloyd’s. (2024). Lloyd’s Annual Report 2024. Retrieved from https://assets.lloyds.com/media-651c0e64-c1d0-4f97-90f7-883c69fe2ef2/530f990a-cdf1-4f3c-b776-4908cba51966/Lloyd%27s-Annual-Report-2024.pdf
31.    Loubser, M. (Ed.). (2018). The law of delict in South Africa (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press
32.    Mandaraka-Sheppard, A. (2013). Modern maritime law: Vol. 2. Managing risks and liabilities (3rd ed.). Abingdon, Oxon: Informa Law.
33.    Mankabady, S. (1978). Collision at sea: A guide to the legal consequences. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
34.    Maritime UK. (2019). Maritime autonomous surface ships industry conduct principles and code of practice (Version 4). Maritime UK.
35.    Mejia, M. (2023). The International Regulatory Framework of Mass Disruption. Regulation of Risk: Transport Trade and Environment in Perspective, Brill Nijhoff, 522-550.
36.    Mo, T., Jiang, Z., & Zheng, Q. (2025). Interactive AI agent for code refactoring assistance: A study on decision-making strategies and human-agent collaboration effectiveness. Academia Nexus Journal, 4(1).
37.    MUNIN. (2016). Research in maritime autonomous systems: Project results and technology potentials. European Commission. http://www.unmanned-ship.org/munin/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/MUNIN-final-brochure.pdf. Accessed 16 January 2020.
38.    Neethling, J., & Potgieter, J. (2015). The Law of Delict. Ann. Surv. S. African L., 805.
39.    Ning, J., Chen, H., Li, T., Li, W., & Li, C. (2020). COLREGs-compliant unmanned surface vehicles collision avoidance based on multi-objective genetic algorithm. IEEE Access, 8, 190367–190377. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3030262
40.    Norwegian Maritime Authority. (2020). Circular series V – RSV 12-2020: Guidance in connection with the construction or installation of automated functionality aimed at performing unmanned or partially unmanned operations. Retrieved from https://www.sdir.no/contentassets/4a53330c795c42a8ad4e3f75379f4bb8/rsv-12-2020-guidance-in-connection-with-the-construction-or-installation-of-automated-functionality.pdf
41.    OECD. (2024). Framework for the Anticipatory Governance of Emerging Technologies, https://doi.org/10.1787/0248ead5-en.
42.    Owen, D. R. (1976–1977). Origins and development of marine collision law. Tulane Law Review, 51(4), 759.
43.    Perera, L. P. (2019). Deep learning toward autonomous ship navigation and possible COLREGs failures. Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, 142, 031102. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4045372
44.    Porathe, T. (2019). Maritime autonomous surface ships (MASS) and the COLREGS: Do we need quantified rules or is “the ordinary practice of seamen” specific enough? TransNav: International Journal of Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, 13, 511–518. https://doi.org/10.12716/1001.13.03.04
45.    Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act). Official Journal of the European Union, L 2024/1689 (12 July 2024). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj/eng
46.    Ringbom, H. (2019). Regulating autonomous ships—Concepts, challenges and precedents. Ocean Development & International Law, 50(2–3), 141–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2019.1582593
47.    Ringbom, H. (2020). Legalizing autonomous ships. Ocean Yearbook Online, 34(1), 429-460.
48.    Ringbom, H., Viljanen, M., Poikonen, J., & Ilvessalo, S. (2020). Charting regulatory frameworks for maritime autonomous surface ship testing, pilots, and commercial deployments. MOTAC, Helsinki.
49.    Rivkin, B. S. (2021). Unmanned ships: Navigation and more. Gyroscopy and Navigation, 12, 96–108. https://doi.org/10.1134/S2075108721010090
50.    Rosas, A., & Ringbom, H. (Eds.). (2023). The EU and the Baltic Sea Area (Vol. 118). Bloomsbury Publishing.
51.    Sadeghi Neshat, A. (1991). Marine Insurance Law (1st ed.). Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines Training Institute. (in Persian)
52.    Soyer, B. (2006). Warranties in marine insurance (2nd ed.). London: Cavendish.
53.    Soyer, B., & Tettenborn, A. (2022). Artificial intelligence and civil liability—do we need a new regime?. International Journal of Law and Information Technology, 30(4), 385-397. Retrieved from https://academic.oup.com/ijlit/article/30/4/385/7039697 (last visited: 2023)
54.    Tabatabaei,S. M. S. and Amini,M. (2025). The dynamics of Imamia jurisprudence in the possibility of accepting "legal personality" for artificial intelligence. Research and development in private law, 2(3), 183-215. doi: 10.22034/jpl.2025.721261. (in Persian)
55.    Tetley, W. (2004). Glossary of maritime law terms (2nd ed.). Langlois Gaudreau O’Connor
56.    Ugurlu, H., & Cicek, I. (2022). Analysis and assessment of ship collision accidents using fault tree and multiple correspondence analysis. Ocean Engineering, 245, 110514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.110514
57.    UK P&I Club. (2024). Directors’ Report & Financial Statements 2024. Retrieved from https://www.ukpandi.com/fileadmin/uploads/ukpandi/Documents/uk-p-i-club/report-and-accounts/2024/Directors_Report_2024.pdf
58.    Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B., & Russell, C. (2021). Why fairness cannot be automated: Bridging the gap between EU non-discrimination law and AI. Computer Law & Security Review, 41, 105567.
59.    Wendehorst, C., Borghetti, J. S., Koch, B. A., Machnikowski, P., Pichonnaz, P., de las Heras Ballell, T. R., & Dudek, T. (2022). ELI Feedback on the European Commission's Proposal for a Revised Product Liability Directive.
60.    Zampella, P. (2019). Maritime and air law facing unmanned vehicle technology (Unpublished PhD thesis, Università degli Studi di Cagliari, Italy).
61.    Zampella, P. (2019). Maritime and air law facing unmanned vehicle technology (Doctoral dissertation, Università degli Studi di Cagliari).