Searching:
  • Acts
  • SIs
  • Civil Procedure Rules
  • Bills before Parliament
Searching:
  • Official Journal C
  • OJC Documents (in CELEX)
  • EU Cases
  • EU Legislation
  • EU Treaties
  • EU Proposals
  • EU Nat. Implementation
  • EU Parl. Questions
  • EFTA Documents
  • EU External Agreements
  • OJ Daily
  • Human Rights Conventions
Searching:
  • HERMES
  • Times
  • EU News and Commentaries
  • CUP Journals
  • Bills before Parliament
  • Other Articles
  • PLC
  • OUP Journals
  • Blackwell Journals
  • RMIT Journals
  • Court Forms
close
Island Car Rentals Ltd (Montego Bay) v Headley Lindo
To see all the information available for this document you will need to Sign In.

1 User Commentary

Melanie Davidson (In-house lawyer) 28 September 2015

Case Digest: Island Car Rentals Ltd (Montego Bay) v Headley Lindo [2015] JMCA App 2

0 reviews Your rating:

The Appeal Court of Jamaica handed down its judgment in Island Car Rentals Ltd (Montego Bay) v Headley Lindo [2015] JMCA App 2.

On November 16, 2005, Mr Lindo was injured in a car accident involving one of the appellant’s vehicles and another vehicle in which he was a fee-paying passenger. He filed a claim, in 2008, against the owners and drivers of both vehicles. Island Car Rentals Ltd was named as the 2nd defendant to the claim.

The appellant sought a summary judgment against Mr Lindo on the principle set out in Avis Rent-a-Car Ltd v Maitland (1980) 32 WIR 294 which had long been accepted as the authority  that a person who lets a motor vehicle out on hire, is not, by virtue of that transaction, vicariously liable for the negligent driving of the person to whom he hires the vehicle to.

In the proceedings before King J, the appellant’s application was refused on the basis that, despite that well established principle, there was another issue joined between Mr Lindo and the appellant on whether Island Car Rentals had negligently allowed their vehicle, which it knew to be defective, to be driven on the public roadway. The main question to be decided, was whether or not the appellant’s complaint had any reasonable prospect of success, if it was granted the permission to appeal.

In a judgment given by Brooks J, he affirmed the decision of King J “In order to secure permission to appeal, Island has to show that it has a real prospect of succeeding if it were granted permission”. On the latter issue raised, the appellant failed to adduced evidence that it allowed its defective vehicle to be driven on a public roadway.

The application for permission to appeal is refused. Costs of the application to the respondent to be taxed if not agreed.

database/2017-10-19T20:53:23.4031662Z/10272909

Getting the most out of


JustCite is a one-of-its-kind legal research tool that shows you how materials cite and relate to each other. It has an enormous index of information about legal documents and where to find them, but does not contain the documents themselves.

Justis is our full-text online legal library, with an ever-growing range of primary and specialist law reports, judgments and legislation from the UK, Ireland, EU, Australia and Canada.

Register for a Free Trial
Get started with Justis and JustCite now