A US court has ruled that car-sharing companies should be afforded the same legal protection as rental organisations.

In what is widely believed to be the first such ruling, a judge in Queens, New York, has deemed that the burgeoning car-sharing outfit Zipcar would be able to avail itself of the same protections under the 2005 federal Graves Amendment, which protects rental car agencies against being liable for accidents that involve their vehicles.

Supreme Court Justice Roger N. Rosengarten said that while the members-only car sharing group is marketed as an alternative to using rental cars, it would nonetheless be able to claim protection under the same laws. Justice Rosengarten declared that despite Zipcar’s claims to the contrary, they were essentially offering the use of a vehicle in return for a fee which technically meant they were considered as the same type of operator as more ‘traditional’ car rental schemes. The court ruled that Zipcar was plainly in the business of leasing or renting motor vehicles, with those terms having clearly defined understandings in the community.

The court hearing was around a complaint over personal injury against Zipcar after the case was presented by Leslie Minto, who argued that Zipcar was responsible for injuries she suffered when she was rear-ended by Zipcar member Dale Douglas in May 2009, who was driving one of the share-cars at the time of the incident. In their defence, Zipcar cited the Federal Transportation Equity Act of 2005, or Graves Amendment, which precludes prosecution in the event of a rental car driver being at fault for any accident.