Vehicles are covered by sector type approval legislation listed in Annex I Section B, including motor vehicles, agricultural and forestry vehicles and two and three wheel vehicles, together with civil aviation and marine equipment. An AI system that is a safety component of a vehicle, or is itself a vehicle product, can be high risk under Article 6(1) where third party conformity assessment is required under the sector legislation. The AI requirements are then to be integrated through the sector legislation, with only the AI Act provisions named in Article 2(2) applying directly. Driver assistance and automated driving functions must therefore be assessed under the sector approval system first, not under the AI Act alone.
Which vehicle and transport legislation is in Annex I?
Annex I Section B lists the sector legislation that governs the approval of vehicles and related transport products. The families named in the consolidated Annex include civil aviation under Regulation (EU) 2018/1139, motor vehicles under the type approval framework in Regulation (EU) 2018/858, agricultural and forestry vehicles under Regulation (EU) No 167/2013, two and three wheel vehicles and quadricycles under Regulation (EU) No 168/2013, and marine equipment under Directive 2014/90/EU. Each of those instruments has its own scope, definitions, approval procedures and authorities. A vehicle product may also be subject to other legislation, including general safety requirements for vehicles and rules on specific systems such as braking or steering. The Annex I entry is a pointer to the sector system, not a complete description of it. A team working on a vehicle function should identify every sector instrument that applies to the vehicle and to the function, and should record which instrument requires third party assessment for the vehicle as a whole or for the system concerned. That sector identification is the foundation for the Article 6(1) analysis.
How does type approval change the AI Act question?
Type approval is a sector procedure in which a type of vehicle or system is approved before vehicles of that type are placed on the market. It differs from the New Legislative Framework conformity modules used for many Section A products, because approval is granted by a designated authority on the basis of sector technical requirements, tests and documentation. For an AI function in a vehicle, the relevant question is how the sector approval system addresses the function: whether the function is part of an approved system, whether software updates change the approved type, and whether the sector requirements already address data, logging, human oversight, accuracy and robustness in terms that match the AI Act requirements. Article 2(2) anticipates that integration, by limiting direct AI Act application for Section B products and expecting the sector legislation to carry the substantive requirements. A reader should therefore ask for the sector approval file and the sector requirements for the function, and should not assume that a general AI Act conformity file can be substituted for the type approval file. Where the sector system has not yet integrated a particular AI requirement, that gap should be recorded as an open item for confirmation with the approval authority.
For the broader regulatory framework, see products, machinery and vehicles overview.
What is the difference between assistance and automated driving for classification?
The labels assistance and automated driving describe very different functions, and the classification analysis must follow the function rather than the label. A driver assistance function that warns a driver, or that supports a driver who remains in control, may have a different safety role from a function that performs the driving task, controls speed and steering, or decides when to hand control back. The safety component test in Article 3 asks whether the component fulfils a safety function or whether its failure endangers health and safety. Both kinds of function can meet that test, but for different reasons and with different evidence. The intended purpose, the operational design domain, the role of the human driver, the fallback behaviour and the failure consequences all matter. A function that is described in marketing as assistance but that in practice performs sustained control should be assessed on its actual function. Conversely, a warning function should not be treated as an automated driving system merely because it uses a learned model. The record should describe the function in operational terms, with the human role and the failure behaviour stated plainly, so that a reviewer who was not present at the design meetings can follow the reasoning.
How do software updates affect a vehicle approval?
Vehicles receive software updates throughout their life, and an update can change an AI function, its data, its behaviour or its safety role. Under the sector system, an update may require a new approval, an extension of an existing approval, or a notification, depending on the sector rules and on whether the change affects the approved type. Under the AI Act, a change may also be a substantial modification, which is dealt with in a separate guide in this cluster. The two analyses must be run together. A software change that is minor for type approval purposes may still be material for the AI function, and a change that is material for type approval may also change the AI classification. The update record should therefore include the version, the functions changed, the data or model changed, the safety assessment, the sector approval decision and the AI Act assessment, with dates and approvers. Over the air updates add a further question about when the updated system is put into service for a vehicle already in use, and about the information given to the vehicle owner and driver. Those questions should be raised with the approval authority and with a legal adviser rather than answered from a general guide.
What about aviation, marine and other transport sectors?
Civil aviation and marine equipment follow the same Section B logic, but with their own safety systems, authorities and certification procedures. In aviation, safety is governed through a detailed certification and oversight system under Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 and the European Union Aviation Safety Agency framework. An AI function that supports flight, navigation, air traffic management or maintenance must be assessed inside that system, with the sector safety requirements taking the lead. In the marine sector, equipment approval follows Directive 2014/90/EU and the relevant international and Union requirements for marine equipment. The common lesson across transport sectors is that the sector safety authority is the primary interlocutor, and the AI Act classification is an additional lens, not a replacement. A transport team should identify its sector authority early, ask how AI functions are to be presented in the sector file, and record the authority response. A general statement that a transport function is high risk or is not high risk, made without the sector file, should be treated as provisional at best.
Continue with Annex I Section A and Section B.
What does this guide not decide?
This guide does not decide whether any named vehicle, driving function, aviation system or item of marine equipment is high risk, and it does not describe any type approval procedure in full. It does not state when a software update requires a new approval, and it does not address road traffic law, driver licensing, insurance or liability, which are separate legal areas. The consolidated Annex I, the sector type approval legislation and the guidance of the relevant approval authority must be checked for the specific product. A manufacturer or operator with a vehicle or transport system approaching approval should confirm the position with the approval authority and a legal adviser, and should not rely on this general overview as a legal determination.
Frequently asked questions
Does the AI Act replace vehicle type approval?
No. Vehicle and transport products in Annex I Section B keep their sector approval systems. The AI Act classification under Article 6(1) applies, but Article 2(2) limits direct application and expects the substantive AI requirements to be integrated through the sector legislation. The type approval file remains the central file, and the AI analysis must be linked to it.
Is every driver assistance function high risk?
Not necessarily. The safety component test in Article 3 must be applied to the specific function, its safety role and its failure consequences. Assistance, warning and automated driving functions differ in those respects, and the intended purpose and operational design must be examined. A function should not be classified from its marketing label alone.
Do software updates need a fresh AI Act assessment?
They may do. An update can change the function, the data, the behaviour or the safety role, and it can amount to a substantial modification or affect the sector approval. Each material update should be logged and assessed under both the sector rules and the AI Act, with the sector approval decision recorded alongside the AI assessment.
When do the Annex I rules apply to vehicles?
The Chapter III high risk rules for Annex I systems apply from 2 August 2028 under Article 113 as amended by Regulation (EU) 2026/1744. Sector approval duties may apply earlier under the sector legislation itself. Both timetables should be checked, and transitional provisions in the sector legislation should not be overlooked.
Continue through this AI Act cluster
This article is an informational overview, not a legal determination. Check the current legal text and official implementation guidance for your system and role.
Consolidated Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 ↗AI Act Service Desk timeline ↗