Haw. Rev. Stat. § 431:10C-104
HRS § 431:10C-104
Car rental company's use limitation provision not violative of compliance with minimum insurance requirements as limitation provision is proper exercise of company's authority to restrict scope of a renter's permissive use.82 Haw. 351,922 P.2d 964. Section requires motor vehicle owner to insure vehicle for periods and amounts established; it does not mandate that insurers provide coverage for any and all accidents that occur on a public road, street, or highway.82 Haw. 351,922 P.2d 964. Against public policy for rent-a-car company vehicle owner to acquire coverage for its vehicles as required by subsection (b) by contractually shifting primary responsibility for providing minimum insurance coverage to permissive user's policy and providing liability coverage under the unilateral contract with the permissive user only where user's personal insurance policy is insufficient to meet the minimum statutorily required amount.88 Haw. 274,965 P.2d 1274. Obtaining insurance after trial has concluded is an insufficient basis to obtain either a new trial, an amended judgment, or relief from judgment under this section. 90 H. 441, 978 P.2d 879. Subsection (b) applied to defendant, where defendant argued that traffic statutes involved only applied to businesses and state vehicles; subsection (b) did not violate defendant's freedom of movement. 77 H. 222 (App.), 883 P.2d 644. Driving without no-fault insurance is a "traffic offense". 78 H. 33 (App.), 889 P.2d 1092. Even if police had specific articulable facts to believe defendant committed offense, police were not authorized to order defendant out of defendant's car, physically arrest defendant, and search defendant incident thereto. 78 H. 98 (App.), 890 P.2d 685. State must prove beyond reasonable doubt three elements in order to convict a driver who is not the owner of the vehicle.86 Haw. 331 (App.),949 P.2d 171. State of mind of defendant is an element of an offense under this section; court must presume that borrower of motor vehicle reasonably believed vehicle was insured; in order to convict defendant, State must prove that state of mind of a person who borrowed an uninsured motor vehicle was "knowing" or "reckless".86 Haw. 331 (App.),949 P.2d 171. When a defendant is charged with a violation of this section, § 805-13 is the proper procedural statute for the district court, enforcement officers, and the prosecutor's office to follow.86 Haw. 331 (App.),949 P.2d 171. Self-insurance under § 431:10C-105 should be considered a defense, which the prosecution need not disprove unless some evidence to support the defense has been introduced.90 Haw. 130 (App.),976 P.2d 444.