The moving defendant sought summary judgment dismissing a motor vehicle negligence action against her arising from a collision caused by her estranged spouse driving her vehicle while impaired.
The issue was whether the vehicle was in the driver’s possession with the owner’s implied consent under s. 192(2) of the Highway Traffic Act, or alternatively whether the owner was negligent in safeguarding her car keys.
The court held the owner rebutted the statutory presumption of consent, finding she had taken reasonable steps to prevent access to the vehicle and did not grant express or implied permission.
The alleged inconsistencies in her testimony were immaterial and did not undermine credibility on the central issues.
The court also rejected the insurer’s negligence argument, finding the owner acted as a reasonable and prudent person in controlling the keys.
