本文關(guān)鍵詞： 保險人 說明義務(wù) 理論 實務(wù)　出處：《華東政法大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：保險人的說明義務(wù)自1995年我國《保險法》誕生之日起，便是學(xué)界一直研究的課題。至今已經(jīng)過去17年，但是這個問題依然還在討論中。實務(wù)中的主要問題是說明義務(wù)缺乏可操作性的評判標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，導(dǎo)致保險業(yè)務(wù)中的大量糾紛，重創(chuàng)了保險業(yè)在廣大人民群眾心目中的應(yīng)有的形象。有鑒于此，筆者通過大量資料的整理研究，試圖提出一些現(xiàn)行說明義務(wù)的完善意見。 本碩士論文由三個部分組成。 第一部分：介紹保險人說明義務(wù)的定義、特征、國內(nèi)外此項法律制度的歷史沿革，以及與投保人告知義務(wù)的異同之處。 第二部分：闡述了保險人說明義務(wù)的法理基礎(chǔ)。首先，說明義務(wù)的法律基礎(chǔ)源于民法的霸王條款即最大誠實信用原則。其次，由于保險合同的格式條款在保險業(yè)的廣泛運用，合同法中的格式條款理論為說明義務(wù)提供了依據(jù)。最后，保險相對民眾的知識水平，具有天生的專業(yè)性、復(fù)雜性，故經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)中的信息不對稱理論也在法學(xué)學(xué)科中為保險人說明義務(wù)提供了理論支持。 第三部分：此部分是本文的重點內(nèi)容。分別從六個方面審視了實踐中的問題及提出完善建議。 第一方面：說明義務(wù)的履行主體。對保險人及其員工、保險代理人、保險經(jīng)紀(jì)人提出不同的履行說明義務(wù)的要求。 第二方面：說明義務(wù)履行的時間和對象。時間上，說明義務(wù)履行的是先合同義務(wù)。對象上，保險人說明的對象應(yīng)為投保人或其代理人，而非被保險人。 第三方面：說明義務(wù)的范圍。將保險合同條款分為四類，分類提出了履行說明義務(wù)的不同標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，，并總結(jié)了實務(wù)中說明義務(wù)的八大問題，提出自己的淺顯意見。 第四方面：說明義務(wù)的履行標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。對形式標(biāo)準(zhǔn)與實質(zhì)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)行了一一闡述。本文支持實質(zhì)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中的“修正的一般標(biāo)準(zhǔn)”作為說明義務(wù)的履行標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。 第五方面：說明義務(wù)的履行方式�！罢f明”與“明確說明”在操作中很難做明確區(qū)分。應(yīng)推行不同條款不同說明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的分層機制即：“免除保險人責(zé)任條款”執(zhí)行“保險人提示規(guī)則+保險人主動說明規(guī)則”；“一般保險條款的說明義務(wù)”執(zhí)行“保險人提示規(guī)則+投保人主動詢問說明規(guī)則”。 第六方面：違反說明義務(wù)的法律后果。其法律后果有不發(fā)生效力和解除合同兩種觀點。我國采用不發(fā)生效力說，筆者認(rèn)為需依照具體案情而定，不能一概而論。
[Abstract]:Since the birth of the Insurance Law in 1995, the insurer's obligation of explanation has been the subject of academic research. However, this issue is still under discussion. The main problem in practice is the lack of operational criteria for the evaluation of obligations, which leads to a large number of disputes in insurance business. In view of this, the author tries to put forward some suggestions on the perfection of the present explanation obligation through the collation and study of a large number of materials. This thesis consists of three parts. The first part introduces the definition and characteristics of the insurer's obligation to explain, the historical evolution of the legal system at home and abroad, and the similarities and differences between the insurer and the policyholder. The second part expounds the legal basis of the insurer's obligation of explanation. Firstly, the legal basis of the obligation of explanation originates from the principle of maximum good faith in civil law. Secondly, due to the widespread application of the form clause of insurance contract in the insurance industry, The theory of format clause in contract law provides the basis for explaining the obligation. Finally, the level of knowledge of insurance in relation to the public is inherently professional and complex. Therefore, the theory of information asymmetry in economics also provides theoretical support for the insurer's obligation of explanation in the subject of law. The third part: this part is the main content of this paper. It examines the problems in practice from six aspects and puts forward some suggestions. The first aspect: the main body of performance of the obligation. The insurer and its employees, insurance agents, insurance agents, insurance brokers put forward different requirements for the performance of the obligation. The second aspect: explain the time and object of performing the obligation. In time, it is the prior contract obligation to show the obligation to perform. On the object, the object of the insurer's explanation should be the policyholder or its agent, but not the insured. The third aspect: expounding the scope of obligation. The article of insurance contract is divided into four categories, which puts forward the different standards of fulfilling the obligation of explanation, summarizes the eight problems of explaining obligation in practice, and puts forward its own simple opinions. Aspect 4th: the standard of performance of the obligation of explanation. The formal standard and the standard of substance are expounded one by one. This paper supports the "modified general standard" in the substantive standard as the standard of performance of the obligation of explanation. Aspect 5th: the manner in which the obligation is to be fulfilled. It is difficult to make a clear distinction between the "description" and the "clear description" in operation. A hierarchical mechanism with different specifications and standards should be implemented, namely, "exemption from insurer liability clause" "the insurer prompts the rule the insurer takes the initiative to explain the rule"; "the general insurance clause's explanation duty" carries out "the insurer prompts the rule the policy-holder to inquire the explanation rule". 6th aspects: the legal consequences of breach of the obligation of explanation. There are two views on the legal consequences of the breach of the obligation of explanation: no effect and rescission of the contract. In our country, the theory of no effect is adopted, the author thinks that it should be decided according to the specific circumstances of the case, and can not be generalized.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D922.284

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 于海純;;保險人說明義務(wù)程度標(biāo)準(zhǔn)研究[J];保險研究;2008年01期

2 梁鵬;;新《保險法》下說明義務(wù)之履行[J];保險研究;2009年07期

3 李傲,夏軍;試論我國行政補償制度[J];法學(xué)評論;1997年01期

4 焦富民;論誠實信用原則與我國現(xiàn)代合同法的重塑[J];河北法學(xué);2002年04期

5 方樂華;我國“銀行保險”發(fā)展的法律思考[J];河南大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2005年05期

6 千聞;保險人的醒意義務(wù)[J];江蘇保險;1996年Z1期

7 沈暉;;論保險代理人行為對保險人之拘束力[J];江蘇經(jīng)貿(mào)職業(yè)技術(shù)學(xué)院學(xué)報;2011年02期

8 曹興權(quán);反差與調(diào)適:保險人說明義務(wù)的履行——兼論《保險法》第17、18條的修改[J];求索;2005年02期

9 王恩韶;《保險法》:一部具有中國特色和國際水準(zhǔn)的法律——《保險法》起草小組副組長王恩韶教授訪談錄[J];上海保險;1995年10期

10 方樂華;論保險合同的成立及其效力——關(guān)于保險合同法修改的法律思考[J];上海保險;2005年05期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 石建光;保險人的說明義務(wù)[D];華東政法大學(xué);2010年

2 李寒光;保險人說明義務(wù)的法律研究[D];西南財經(jīng)大學(xué);2010年

本文編號：1498514