Robotics & Drones

Autonomous Robot Liability

Is there a special statute on robots?

No. Damage caused by an autonomous robot is assessed under the Civil Code's defective-product norms: the producer is liable for damage caused by the product even without a contractual relationship.

What is a defective product?

A product that does not provide the safety which, taking all circumstances into account, was to be expected of it. The later appearance of a better product does not make it defective.

Can liability be excluded in advance?

No. Under Article 1016, the producer's liability may not be excluded or limited in advance, and a contrary agreement is void.

Who bears the burden of proof?

The injured party. The producer is released only in the cases established by law — including where the defect could not have been discovered at the relevant state of science and technology. A supplier is deemed a producer where the identity cannot be established and he did not present the real producer within 1 month.

5 min·9 Jan 2026

Autonomous robot liability: the legal framework

Autonomous robots — self-driving machines, industrial manipulators, service robots — act in the physical world and can cause damage. Georgia has no statute specifically devoted to robots, and this does not mean a legal vacuum: such damage is assessed under the norms of the Georgian Civil Code on defective products, which regulate the producer's liability. This page examines how this framework works for devices in which decisions are taken by software.

The anchor norm is Article 1009 of the Civil Code: the producer of a defective product is liable for damage caused by that product, regardless of whether he was in a contractual relationship with the injured party. This is an important detail: the producer of a robot that caused damage may have no relationship with the injured person — liability still exists if the product is defective.

What a defective product is and what the concept of product includes

Under Article 1010, a product is deemed defective where it does not provide the safety which, taking all circumstances into account, was to be expected of it. The same article specifies: a product is not deemed defective merely because a better product was later put into circulation. For an autonomous robot, the assessment of safety is determined precisely by the functionality the device had at the relevant time.

Article 1011 defines the concept of product broadly: a product is every movable thing and service connected with a thing, even if that thing is a component part of another movable or immovable thing. This means that a software-controlled device, its components and the services connected with it fall together within this framework. A producer is deemed to be the person who manufactured the final product, a basic element or a part of the product; also everyone who presents himself as a producer under his own name or distinguishing mark.

Where establishing the identity of the producer is impossible, every supplier is deemed a producer, unless he presents the producer, or the person who supplied him the product, to the injured party within 1 month of the request.

Updated: 14 Oct 2026

Verified against current law: 9 Jul 2026