Drone Regulations
30. Are there any special rules about the liability of UAS operators for surface damage?
Bahamas
There are no rules which apply specially to a RPA in respect of liability for surface damage.
Bolivia
This is not detailed in the regulation.
Brazil
Third party insurance certificate should be hired in accordance with section 23 herein.
Canada
No
Colombia
At first place, any UAS operation violation of the current regulation will constitute an infraction in accordance with the sanctioning regime contained in the Aeronautical Regulations of Colombia (RAC) part 13, without prejudice to civil, criminal or police liability that may drive from the activity performed.
Besides according to police code, authorities competent for the effective fulfillment of the police function may suspend or prevent all activity with UAS and seize the device involved when they notice any violation of applicable legal dispositions or when operation represents an imminent threat to citizen security, coexistence and security. In those cases, police authority could coordinate with UAEAC to take the relevant measures related to custody of the UAS and all measures that maintain adequate control over operations whatever class is.
To keep the control and order in UAS operation, authorities may intercept and disable UAS by using electronic countermeasures or any other mechanism that they consider useful for the purpose.
Costa Rica
There are not specific rules and the Directive does not establish a minimum amount that is required for the civil liability insurance.
El Salvador
The RAC-VANT establishes that UAS’ registered owner will assume civil or criminal liability for damage caused to properties or persons in the surface or during the flight.
Germany
According to article 33 (1) German Aviation Act (Luftverkehrsgesetz/LuftVG), there is strict liability of the UAS owner in case of bodily injury or damage to the property caused by the UAS operation, including damages caused by any object falling from a UAS during flight. This means that the owner is liable regardless of fault. The owner’s liability applies even if it is not the user. It can discharge itself of liability only if the operator uses the UAS without the knowledge and will of the owner, and if it did not enable the operator to use the UAS.
The liability for aircraft with a Minimum Take Off Weight below 500kg is limited to a maximum of SDR 750,000 according to article 37 German Aviation Act (Luftverkehrsgesetz/LuftVG).
Guatemala
Article No. 101.57 of the RAC-101 establishes that the UAS’ owner will be liable for damages caused on the surface and during the flight.
India
No, presently there are no special rules in India in respect of liability of UAS operators for surface damage, but the CAR makes the UAS operator responsible for any injury to persons or damage to property caused directly or indirectly by the UAS.
Israel
As far as we are aware, there are no specific rules regarding liability of UAS operators for surface damage. Therefore, Israeli tort legislation (mainly, Israel’s Civil Wrongs Ordinance [New Version]), shall apply.
Italy
No, there are no specific rules in this respect. Therefore, general rules apply to the liability of UAS operators for surface damages. In particular, article 965 of the Italian Navigation Code and the Rome Convention of 1952 apply to damages to third parties on the surface and they provide for a strict liability principle against the operator. It means that means that evidence of the existence of a direct connection between the drone operation and the damage shall be sufficient to allocate liability, irrespective of whether the operator has acted with fault, negligence or wilful misconduct.
Kenya
There are no special rules on the liability of UAS operators for surface damage. However, Section 59 and 60 of the CAA places the liability for loss or damage caused to any property on land or water by a person or article falling from an aircraft while on flight, taking off or landing to the owner of the aircraft unless the loss or damage is caused or contributed to by the person to whom it was suffered.[43]
Where the aircraft is demised, let or hired out for a period exceeding 14 days and no pilot, commander navigator or operative member of the crew of the aircraft is employed by the owner, the person to which the aircraft is demised to, let to or hired to will be strictly liable for the damage.[44]
[43] Section 59 of the CAA
[44] Section 59 of the CAA
Mexico
Mandatory rules “CO AV23/10 R4” provide that RPAS must have insurance covering damages against third parties.
Nicaragua
There is not an express regulation on this matter.
Norway
According to the UAS Regulations Section 8, operators of UAS falling within the model airplane category have a strict liability for damage or loss occurring due to the aviation operations.
According to Section 17, which applies to all RPAS-operators (other than just operation of model airplanes) there is a strict liability for the operator for any third-party loss or damage due to the aviation operations. The strict liability does not apply to damage to other aircraft or persons or objects within such aircraft.
Civil UAS operators must have mandatory liability insurance, cf. Section 18.
Pakistan
No, however under the ANO, no person shall operate a URCSUA in a way that creates a hazard to another aircraft, another person, or property.
Every person operating the URCSUA shall ensure no thing is dropped or discharged from a URCSUA in a way that creates a hazard to another aircraft, person or property on ground.
The Operations-Commander (“OC”) are the “on field” persons designated to take responsibility for all matters relating to the operation of the URCSUA and for the safety, including safety of crowd, collision avoidance and adherence to the Rules. All operations related matters are also the OC’s responsibility. The OC may also be or act as the OIC. In any event, the OC has to be declared the OC before the commencement of an operation. If the OC for any reason is not physically present on the field, the operations must be halted until another OC is declared to be present on the field.
It is important to note that the URCSUA OIC is held accountable for controlling the aircraft to the same standards as a pilot of a manned aircraft is and it is the responsibility of the OC to ensure that the OIC maintains the said standard.
Panama
The Regulations establishes that all the operators and RPA’s pilots of every RPA category, regardless of their use, will be responsible for the damages they may cause to third parties during their operations. Furthermore, as we mentioned above, all the operators that desire to use their RPAs for commercial purposes should obtain, before the beginning of their commercial activities, the Operation Certificate from the AAC, and being one of the requirements for its procurement, the obtaining of a third-party liability insurance policy.
Philippines
Presently, the PCAR does not provide for special rules about the liability of UAS operators for surface damage. However, RPAS operators should have RPA insurance or third party liability insurance.
Portugal
UAS operators are strictly liable for any damage caused to third parties, except if the accident was exclusively caused by the party who sustained the damage.
Puerto Rico
There is no state legislation covering this in Puerto Rico.
Romania
No, there are no special rules about the liability of UAS operators for surface damage, excepting the general provisions from the Civil Code regarding the civil liability.
South Africa
No.
Spain
Under the Air Navigation Act, UAS are considered as aircraft, hence in case of damages to third parties the same liabilities than conventional aircraft will be applicable to UAS. Pursuant to RD 1036/2017, the UAS operator is liable for the operations carried out by its drone towards the authorities and against third parties, same applies from the European Regulations. In this regard, the compensation rules foreseen in Royal Decree 37/2001 are applicable to those drones whose MTOW does not exceed from 20kg. For drones of more than 20kg of MTOW the limits and liabilities for surface damage of Regulation (EC) No. 785/2004 shall apply.
Switzerland
The Rome Convention 1952 has not been ratified in Switzerland. However, art. 64 of the Federal Act on Air Transport provides for a liability of the operator of the UAS (which does not necessarily correspond to its legal owner) for damages to persons or property on the surface. This liability is construed as a strict liability, i.e. irrespective of negligence or fault.
Turkey
No, general rules of liability from damage apply.
United Kingdom
Not as far as we are aware.
United States of America
The FAA has not promulgated specific rules, but general tort law, contract law, and other state specific laws may apply.