“Our object was to give to the sea, which is the natural tie between the nations, the benefit of a uniform law, which will be rational, deliberated, equitable in its inception and practical in its text. We have considered that in our work, the shipowner, the merchant, the underwriter, the average adjuster, the banker, the parties directly interested should have the leading part: that the task of the lawyer was to discern what in this maritime community was the general feeling, which, among these divergent interests, is common to all; to discern also which of the various solutions is the best; to contribute to the common work his science and his experience, but that ultimately the lawyer should hold the pen and that the man of practice should dictate the solutions.”

In this article, the author continues the study of the allocation of tortious liability between the shipowner and software developer in the case of harm to third parties due to an error of the artificial intelligence of an autonomous vessel. Now the focus of attention shifts to the second of the two previously formulated model situations, namely the infliction of harm due to a ship collision (on the basis of Russian law). This analysis provides a new perspective on the standard of shipowner’s liability in a collision. Where harm is caused by a software error of an autonomous vessel, it is more equitable to impose the burden of strict liability on the shipowner for program errors. This approach should be pursued explicitly to avoid a mixture of de jure strict liability and de facto strict liability imputed under the guise of a fault-based breach of a duty to make a ship seaworthy. This does not exclude further recourse by the shipowner against the software developer. On the contrary, as regards the liability of the software developer towards third parties, the conclusions of the first part of the study remain valid: the software developer may bear the liability for fault-based violations committed while creating the IT product. At the same time, the question as to how far such a link between the software and its creator can be established remains open.

In December 2021 a bill on autonomous shipping has been introduced into the Russian State Duma. The article analyzes whether it is time to adopt legislation on this subject. The author describes international experience in the field of autonomous shipping and sets out various scenarios according to which Russian legislation on this matter can be developed. Some concerns are raised in relation to the Bill’s terminology, its provisions on classification of autonomous vessels, status of remote crew, and performance of shipping contracts. The article points out that adoption of the Bill in its current wording, especially without detailed provisions on autonomous vessels’ liability and its insurance, may result in serious problems.

The problem of the allocation of liability between the shipowner and the software developer in case of harm to third parties due to an error of the artificial intelligence of an autonomous vessel presents a serious challenge for private maritime law. There are mainly two possible situations here: 1) infliction of loss without a ship collision; 2) infliction of loss due to a ship collision. This article, being based on Russian law, is concerned with the first case. The author comes to the conclusion that the shipowner bears under all circumstances the non-contractual liability as the possessor of a source of increased danger (autonomous vessel). Further allocation of losses is most likely to be provided for in the contract between the shipowner and the software developer. At the same time, the injured party is entitled to bring a claim directly against the software developer if the latter committed faulty actions when creating an IT product. Moreover, de lege lata such a developer is not entitled to limitations of liability under the maritime law in force. The results of this article will be useful primarily for shipowners, IT companies and other leading market players – pioneers of autonomous shipping.