Home / Volume 9, Issue 2 / A Comparative Analysis of Legal Liability and Accountability… Open access · CC BY-NC 4.0
Research Paper Volume 9 Issue 2 4531 - 4540 May 16, 2026

A Comparative Analysis of Legal Liability and Accountability Frameworks for Autonomous Artificial Intelligence

Lead author · Corresponding
Arun S
Student at Vels Institute of Science, Technology & Advanced Studies, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
Co-author
T Saroja Devi
Assistant Professor at Vels Institute of Science, Technology & Advanced Studies, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
Abstract

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has evolved from a supportive tool into a semi-autonomous system influencing sectors such as healthcare, finance, transportation, and digital communication. This transformation raises significant legal concerns, particularly regarding liability when AI systems cause harm. Traditional legal frameworks are structured around identifiable human or corporate actors, making it difficult to assign responsibility in cases where AI operates with a degree of autonomy and unpredictability. This study undertakes a comparative analysis of legal liability and accountability frameworks for autonomous AI across major jurisdictions, including the European Union, United States, United Kingdom, China, and India. It argues that neither fault-based liability nor the concept of granting legal personhood to AI offers a complete solution. Fault-based approaches face challenges due to the opacity of AI systems, while AI personhood lacks practical feasibility in ensuring compensation and accountability. The paper proposes a layered regulatory approach that combines ex ante obligations—such as risk assessment, documentation, and monitoring—with ex post liability mechanisms tailored to the level of risk involved. It also emphasizes the need for evidentiary flexibility and compensation mechanisms, including insurance frameworks, especially for high-risk AI applications. The study concludes that India must adopt a proactive and structured regulatory model that ensures accountability across the AI lifecycle while safeguarding innovation. Such a framework would bridge the accountability gap without conferring independent legal status on AI systems.

Type
Research Paper
Information
International Journal of Law Management and Humanities, Volume 9, Issue 2, Page 4531 - 4540
Creative Commons
CC BY-NC 4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits remixing, adapting, and building upon the work for non-commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © IJLMH 2026
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this manuscript are those of the author(s) alone and do not reflect the views, policies, or position of the Journal.

Export citation


        
📢 Call for Papers — Volume IX Issue III now open  ·  Impact Factor 7.010  ·  Indexed in HeinOnline, Manupatra & Google Scholar + 1000+ Libraries  ·  Free DOI Submit Now →
Chat with us