Aviation Anthology Vol 1 2026 - Digital Version - Flipbook - Page 16
In the longer term, broader reform may be required. In
the nearer term, however, the Commission proposes
a more targeted adjustment. Recommendation 30
proposes modifying the s76 protection as it applies
to UAS, making it conditional on compliance with
aviation legislation specifically directed at preventing
intrusive use of airspace over land. This represents a
measured attempt to adjust the existing position without
displacing it entirely, while recognising that the intensity
and proximity of drone activity may justify a narrower
scope of protection than has historically applied to
conventional aircraft.
UAS insurance review
Insurance is likely to play a central role in the
development of the UAS sector, although the Report
addresses the issue only at a high level. This reflects the
fact that the UK Government has already committed,
through the Future of Flight Regulatory Review[10], to a
broader examination of insurance requirements for new
and novel aircraft.
Against that background, the Commission, in its
Recommendation 29, confines itself to identifying key
issues that should form part of that review. These include
how insurance requirements should apply in the context
of multiple simultaneous operations, whether risk
should be assessed by reference to overall operational
exposure rather than aircraft weight, and the extent to
which insurers will require access to operational and
incident data. The treatment of war risks is also identified
as an area requiring attention, particularly given the
evolving nature of threats in increasingly automated and
integrated aviation systems.
Taken together, these points indicate that insurance
is likely to be one of the areas in which existing
assumptions come under the greatest pressure. While
the legal structure of liability may remain largely
unchanged, the allocation and pricing of risk may
in practice differ from established patterns as UAS
operations become more widespread.
Conclusion
The Law Commission’s treatment of civil liability in the
context of aviation autonomy is marked by restraint
and continuity. Rather than attempting to anticipate
every future operating model, the Report proceeds on
the basis that established principles of aviation liability
remain capable of adaptation as automation develops.
This reflects a clear preference for legal stability and
internationally aligned regimes in the context of civil
liability and insurance.
Government. The Report will now be considered by the
Department for Transport, which must decide whether
to accept, reject or modify the proposals, typically within
twelve months. Any accepted recommendations will
require implementation, usually through legislation or
regulatory change. The practical impact of the Report
will therefore depend less on its publication and more
on the extent to which its proposals are taken forward
by Government, the Department for Transport, and the
CAA.
Highly-automated and autonomous civil aviation is no
longer a speculative “flight of fancy” in technological
terms. The UK Government’s vision is that by 2030 “the
UK will be a leader in emerging aviation technologies,
with a sustainable industry and a thriving ecosystem at
home, and UK companies providing a range of services
around the world.”[11] Realising that ambition depends
on the development of a legal and regulatory framework
capable of supporting these technologies and
determining civil liability flowing from their operation.
[1] Law Commission, Aviation Autonomy, Final Report (Law Com No 426,
2026).
[2] The remit of the UK Law Commission does not extend to Scotland
or Northern Ireland: the Commission can only make recommendations
in respect of England and Wales. However, they acknowledge that the
issues relating to autonomy in aviation apply across the UK.
[3] The Law Commission is an independent statutory body. This means
it operates at arm’s length from government and reports directly to UK
Parliament and Senedd Cymru (Welsh Parliament).
[4] Law Commission, Aviation Autonomy: Summary of the Final Report.
[5] Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International
Carriage by Air (Montreal, 28 May 1999).
[6] International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) is a specialised
agency of the United Nations (UN) responsible for international civil
aviation, established by the Chicago Convention (1944).
[7] ICAO, Harmonization of Aviation Liability Laws in the Era of
Autonomous Flight: Defining Responsibility in AI Operated Flights and
Unmanned Commercial Air Transport, A42 WP/300, Legal Commission
(LE/7), 29 July 2025 (presented by the Republic of Kazakhstan).
[8] Substantive work on this separate project began by the Law
Commission in September 2025. Stakeholders were invited to engage
with an initial scoping questionnaire with responses helping to formulate
proposals for reform. A formal public consultation on proposals is
currently planned for the second half of 2026 (Law Commission website,
Product Liability).
[9] In the Report, the term “drone” is used generally to describe smaller
uncrewed aircraft which are unoccupied and can be remotely piloted or
autonomous.
[10] UK Government, Department for Transport: Future of Transport
Regulatory Review: Future of Flight.
[11] UK Department of Transport, Future of Flight Action Plan (March
2024).
At the same time, the Report recognises that increased
automation will place pressure on concepts developed
for conventional, human operated aircraft. Questions of
responsibility, evidential complexity and the implications
of intrusive low level drone operations are likely to
become more prominent as UAS activity increases.
The Law Commission’s recommendations do not
take effect automatically but stand as guidance to
16
DAC Beachcroft
Aviation Anthology 2026 - Volume I
