HRS 0431-0010C-0303_0005 ANNOTATIONS

Even if certain defendants were secondarily liable, this statute seemed to preclude such a finding until after plaintiff had prosecuted claims against the vehicle renter's auto insurance company, the primary source of coverage for bodily injury and property damages. Plaintiff's bodily injury and property damage claims against those defendants should be dismissed without prejudice; plaintiff must first pursue an action against the insured vehicle renter. 255 F. Supp. 2d 1149.

Rent-a-car company's rental agreement provision, which attempted to shift primary responsibility for providing minimum insurance coverage to the renter's personal insurance policy, violated the public policy enumerated in this chapter. 88 H. 274, 965 P.2d 1274.

The owner of a vehicle has the primary obligation to provide minimum coverage for the owned vehicle and this obligation may not be avoided through a unilateral contract with a permissive user of the vehicle. 88 H. 274, 965 P.2d 1274.

Where section does not expressly indicate an intent to be applied retroactively and retroactive application would have increased obligations of permissive user's insurance company, enactment of this section has no effect on causes of action arising before its effective date of January 1, 1998. 88 H. 274, 965 P.2d 1274.