On the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on adapting non-contractual civil liability rules to artificial intelligence (AI Liability Directive)
IMCO-AD-768056
Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection · Rapporteur: Kosma Złotowski
Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.
The Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection advises the lead committee to reject the proposed AI Liability Directive. It argues that the AI Act and the revised Product Liability Directive already cover AI liability and that the proposal is premature.¶¶¶ It says the Commission's impact assessment relied on hypothetical scenarios and that guidelines defining AI systems under the AI Act do not yet exist, so the proposal's subject is unclear.¶¶ It warns that new procedural rules on evidence disclosure and burden of proof would raise compliance burdens, especially for SMEs, and could disrupt national civil law systems.¶ It asks for third-party litigation funding to be addressed before further work on the directive, and for real market data and a thorough impact assessment before any new measures.¶
Committee position. The committee proposes that the Committee on Legal Affairs reject the Commission's proposal for an AI Liability Directive, arguing it is premature and unnecessary given existing rules.¶¶
Key points
- The committee calls on the Committee on Legal Affairs to propose rejection of the Commission's proposal for an AI Liability Directive.¶
- It finds adopting an AI Liability Directive at this stage premature and unnecessary.¶
- It notes the AI Act entered into force on 1 August 2024 and its rules apply by August 2026 or 2027, and the Product Liability Directive (EU) 2024/2853 must be transposed by the end of 2026.¶
- It cites the Commission's State of the Digital Decade 2024 report showing slow AI uptake and says innovation-friendly measures are needed instead of more liability burden.¶
- It cites Mario Draghi's 2024 report warning that regulatory burdens harm SMEs and digital sectors and that the EU is falling behind.¶
- It says the Commission's 2022 impact assessment for the proposal used hypothetical scenarios and disregarded insurance premium cost increases.¶
- It points out that guidelines on the definition of AI systems under Article 96(1) of the AI Act do not yet exist, leaving the proposal's subject unclear.¶
- It warns that the proposal's procedural rules on evidence disclosure and burden of proof risk deterring innovation and increasing compliance burdens, particularly for SMEs.¶
- It says the harmonisation argument is speculative and needs clarification.¶
- It recommends waiting for the AI Act and revised Product Liability Directive to be implemented and their internal market impact evaluated.¶
- It finds no demonstrated legal gap or market failure justifying a separate AI Liability Directive and says third-party litigation funding must be addressed first.¶
Who is affected
- Businesses, especially SMEs, which the committee says would face increased compliance burdens and liability costs.¶¶
- National civil law systems, which the committee says could be disrupted by procedural changes.
- The EU's AI innovation and investment climate, which the committee says could be undermined.¶¶
Figures and deadlines
- AI Act entered into force on 1 August 2024.¶
- AI Act rules apply by August 2026 or 2027.
- Product Liability Directive (EU) 2024/2853 must be transposed by the end of 2026.
- Enterprises using AI increased from 7.6% in 2021 to 8.0% in 2023, a rise of 0.4 percentage point.¶
- At current pace, only 16.8% of enterprises will take up AI by 2030, against an EU target of 75%.