sec.60Nominal Defendant’s rights of recourse for uninsured vehicles

### sec.60 Nominal Defendant’s rights of recourse for uninsured vehicles If personal injury arises out of a motor vehicle accident involving an uninsured vehicle, the Nominal Defendant may recover, as a debt, from the owner or driver of the vehicle (or both) any costs reasonably incurred by the Nominal Defendant on a claim for the personal injury. It is a defence to an action by the Nominal Defendant under this section— as far as recovery is sought against the owner—for the owner to prove— that the motor vehicle was driven without the owner’s authority; or that the owner believed on reasonable grounds that the motor vehicle was insured; and as far as recovery is sought against the driver—for the driver to prove that the driver believed on reasonable grounds that the driver had the owner’s consent to drive the motor vehicle and that the motor vehicle was insured. The Nominal Defendant may bring a proceeding for recovery of costs under this section before the costs have been actually paid in full and, in that case, a judgment for recovery of costs may provide that, as far as the costs have not been actually paid, the right to recover the costs is contingent on payment. This section does not affect rights of recovery that the Nominal Defendant may have, apart from this section, against the insured person. (sec.60-ssec.1) If personal injury arises out of a motor vehicle accident involving an uninsured vehicle, the Nominal Defendant may recover, as a debt, from the owner or driver of the vehicle (or both) any costs reasonably incurred by the Nominal Defendant on a claim for the personal injury. (sec.60-ssec.2) It is a defence to an action by the Nominal Defendant under this section— as far as recovery is sought against the owner—for the owner to prove— that the motor vehicle was driven without the owner’s authority; or that the owner believed on reasonable grounds that the motor vehicle was insured; and as far as recovery is sought against the driver—for the driver to prove that the driver believed on reasonable grounds that the driver had the owner’s consent to drive the motor vehicle and that the motor vehicle was insured. (sec.60-ssec.3) The Nominal Defendant may bring a proceeding for recovery of costs under this section before the costs have been actually paid in full and, in that case, a judgment for recovery of costs may provide that, as far as the costs have not been actually paid, the right to recover the costs is contingent on payment. (sec.60-ssec.4) This section does not affect rights of recovery that the Nominal Defendant may have, apart from this section, against the insured person. - (a) as far as recovery is sought against the owner—for the owner to prove— (i) that the motor vehicle was driven without the owner’s authority; or (ii) that the owner believed on reasonable grounds that the motor vehicle was insured; and - (i) that the motor vehicle was driven without the owner’s authority; or - (ii) that the owner believed on reasonable grounds that the motor vehicle was insured; and - (b) as far as recovery is sought against the driver—for the driver to prove that the driver believed on reasonable grounds that the driver had the owner’s consent to drive the motor vehicle and that the motor vehicle was insured. - (i) that the motor vehicle was driven without the owner’s authority; or - (ii) that the owner believed on reasonable grounds that the motor vehicle was insured; and