The defendant vehicle owner brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiffs' action and the co-defendant insurer's cross-claim against her, arguing she did not consent to the co-defendant driver possessing her vehicle at the time of the motor vehicle accident.
The co-defendant insurer opposed the motion, arguing implied consent.
The court first ruled that partial summary judgment was appropriate and ordered the production of the driver's statement to the owner's insurer, finding it was not protected by litigation privilege.
On the merits, the court found that the owner had explicitly forbidden the driver from using her car and that he took it without her knowledge or consent.
The court granted summary judgment in favour of the owner, dismissing the claims against her.
