On 28 September, the European Commission published its proposal for the Artificial Intelligence Liability Directive which complements and modernises the EU civil liability framework by introducing for the first time rules specific to damages caused by AI systems.
The purpose is to lay down uniform rules in case of damages caused by AI systems and to establish broader protection for victims. The Directive is applicable to both individuals and businesses. The new rules will, for instance, make it easier to obtain compensation if someone has been discriminated against in a recruitment process involving AI technology.
It is proposed that five years after the entry into force of the AI Liability Directive, the Commission will assess the need for no-fault liability rules for AI-related claims if necessary.
Consequently, on 3 October, the Commission enabled relevant stakeholders to provide feedback on the proposed AI Liability Directive. All feedback to be received will be summarised by the Commission and presented to the Parliament and Council with the aim of feeding into the legislative debate.
As part of its mandate, ESBG replied to the Commission’s call for feedback on 2 December. In its response, ESBG supports the protection of consumers as well as adapting liability rules to the digital age, thereby setting out a framework for excellence and trust in AI.
However, ESBG understands from the proposed Directive that the presumption of a causal link in the case of fault is mainly a matter of “non-compliance of due diligence duties”. In this context, ESBG calls for clarification on what could be considered as non-compliance of due diligence duties. In particular, ESBG questions whether the presence of bias or discrimination could be considered a noncompliance of due diligence duties. Furthermore, clarification is necessary on what tools are available to providers and users of AI systems to refute the causal link.
Finally, as the AILD is a directive, members stress the importance to take the cultural and legal differences between member states into account when implementing. Different application across member states can lead to regulatory arbitrage where firms choose where to be domiciled according to the member states legislative application. Therefore, the directive should be aligned with the Rome I Regulation and the Rome II Regulation regarding the conflict of laws on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations.
related
February 3, 2023
Advocating on the EU deforestation regulation
What lessons can be learnt from a French diplomat from the XIX century?
January 11, 2023
ESBG responds to the ESAs call for evidence on greenwashing
Therefore, in the interest of customers, banks, saving banks and issuers of financial products, ESBG
October 5, 2022
Joint letter to Commissioner McGuinness on the EFRAG consultation regarding its first set of draft ESRSs
On 27 September, the ESBG, together with the European Banking Federation (EBF), the European Association of Co-operative Banks (EACB), Insurance Europe, Accountancy Europe, Business Europe and…
September 9, 2022
ESBG response to the EFRAG consultation on its first set of draft ESRSs calls to ensure levelled global playing field
In its response to the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) public consultation on the first set of Draft EU Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRSs), the European Savings and Retail…
September 7, 2022
EU Taxonomy minimum safeguards: Criteria for the application of external checks should be further defined
The European Savings and Retail Banking Group submitted its final response to the Platform for Sustainable Finance (PSF) consultation on its draft report on minimum safeguards (MS). In its response,…
August 3, 2022
International Sustainability Standards Board consultation on Sustainability Disclosures
The International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) has been established at COP26 with the purpose of developing a comprehensive global baseline of sustainability disclosures for the capital…
May 27, 2022
ESBG calls for more feasible rules on the new corporate sustainability due diligence
In its response to the European Commission call for feedback on the proposal for a Directive on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence, the European Savings and Retail Banking Group (ESBG) suggests…
April 28, 2022
ESBG response to ESMA’s consultation on guidelines of MiFID II suitability requirements
ESBG's response to the European Securities and Market Authority (ESMA) consultation on some MiFID II sustainability aspects. European banks calls for clear procedures and to avoid unnecessary…
March 3, 2022
Strengthening the quality of corporate reporting and its enforcement in the EU
The consultation aims to evaluate the impact of the EU framework on the three pillars of high quality and reliable corporate reporting: corporate governance, statutory audit and supervision. This…
February 25, 2022
European Commission Banking Package proposal
ESBG responded to the European Commission “have your say" consultation on the Banking Package proposal.