本文選題：責(zé)任保險(xiǎn) + 和解義務(wù)��； 參考：《武漢大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)承保被保險(xiǎn)人對(duì)第三人的潛在法律責(zé)任風(fēng)險(xiǎn),以保障被保險(xiǎn)人之財(cái)務(wù)穩(wěn)定與心境安寧為本質(zhì)。當(dāng)發(fā)生責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)事故,訴訟、仲裁與和解均不失為解決糾紛之良方,但要求當(dāng)事人之間盡可能多地進(jìn)行談判與磋商的"和解"乃是最大限度節(jié)省成本之法,應(yīng)予以必要重視,并在責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人之損失填補(bǔ)義務(wù)之外,基于誠實(shí)信用原則確立責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人和解義務(wù),實(shí)現(xiàn)責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)制度對(duì)被保險(xiǎn)人權(quán)利保護(hù)之本旨。但我國現(xiàn)行《保險(xiǎn)法》僅以兩個(gè)條文簡(jiǎn)單規(guī)制責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)事項(xiàng),存有不足,尤其對(duì)于責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人和解義務(wù)未有涉及;相關(guān)責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)合同中亦無責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人和解義務(wù)條款。本文以相關(guān)理論為基礎(chǔ)并參考國外運(yùn)作經(jīng)驗(yàn),從責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人和解義務(wù)之法律屬性、履行內(nèi)容及違反之法律后果等方面進(jìn)行探討,并提出相應(yīng)的改革完善建議,以期符合當(dāng)代責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)之功能,適應(yīng)誠實(shí)信用原則及當(dāng)事人之需求。本文除引言部分外包括五章內(nèi)容。本文引言部分提出,順應(yīng)當(dāng)代社會(huì)發(fā)展需求,責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)制度應(yīng)予完善,為圓滿實(shí)現(xiàn)其維護(hù)被保險(xiǎn)人財(cái)產(chǎn)安全與心境安寧之制度功能,應(yīng)確立責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人和解義務(wù)。并明確為論述方便,本文在投保人與被保險(xiǎn)人同一情形下進(jìn)行論述。本文第一章在簡(jiǎn)要介紹責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人和解義務(wù)之理解基礎(chǔ)即責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)制度后,主要論述了責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人和解義務(wù)的基本定位,主張采"義務(wù)主義"立法例對(duì)責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人和解行為進(jìn)行規(guī)定,并且責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人和解行為的主導(dǎo)性質(zhì)是義務(wù),其權(quán)利屬性通過其義務(wù)履行體現(xiàn)出來;責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人和解義務(wù)是法定義務(wù),與損失填補(bǔ)義務(wù)同為責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人的主給付義務(wù);在對(duì)責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人和解義務(wù)進(jìn)行界定時(shí)應(yīng)明確責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人具有依誠實(shí)信用原則代被保險(xiǎn)人與第三人和解并促使和解協(xié)議確定的賠償額在責(zé)任限額內(nèi)的義務(wù)。本文第二章重點(diǎn)論述了責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人和解義務(wù)的履行,包括:其履行依據(jù)是民事代理理論;其履行的前提條件一則被保險(xiǎn)人履行了責(zé)任事故發(fā)生及第三人索賠的雙重通知義務(wù),二則產(chǎn)生糾紛的基礎(chǔ)事項(xiàng)落入責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)承保范圍;其履行的方式包括被保險(xiǎn)人、責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人主動(dòng)發(fā)出和解要約及第三人主動(dòng)發(fā)出和解要約兩種方式,并就后者所涉和解要約合理與否、利益沖突解決原則以及三種具體情形(主要反映為和解要約金額、訴訟金額與責(zé)任限額三者之間的不同關(guān)系)下的和解要約接受與否的問題進(jìn)行了深入剖析,主張以"不考慮責(zé)任限額說"為第三人所提和解要約合理與否的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn),對(duì)于和解金額低于責(zé)任限額的和解要約賦予責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人接受與否完全的決定權(quán),其最終承擔(dān)的責(zé)任不以責(zé)任限額為限,反之則由被保險(xiǎn)人完全決定,責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人僅在責(zé)任限額內(nèi)承擔(dān)責(zé)任。另外,本部分還對(duì)責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人和解義務(wù)履行的例外情形、被保險(xiǎn)人自行和解情形以及和解過程中支出的和解費(fèi)用的承擔(dān)進(jìn)行了探討。本文第三章主要論述了責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人拒絕或不完全履行和解義務(wù)時(shí)的責(zé)任承擔(dān)。責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人拒絕履行和解義務(wù)時(shí),其應(yīng)承擔(dān)賠償和解金額、和解費(fèi)用及其利息、"失效權(quán)"的不利后果;責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人不完全履行和解義務(wù)時(shí),建議對(duì)由此給被保險(xiǎn)人造成的加害給付即被保險(xiǎn)人超額責(zé)任的承擔(dān)以違約責(zé)任為訴因,如此將更有利于被保險(xiǎn)人權(quán)利的救濟(jì)。本文第四章指出,關(guān)于責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人和解義務(wù)問題,我國保險(xiǎn)立法中規(guī)定缺失、保險(xiǎn)實(shí)務(wù)中約定不足,由此提出了相應(yīng)的修改完善建議。本文第五章為結(jié)語,總括了責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)人和解義務(wù)建立的必要性及合理性,指出本文的研究意義。
[Abstract]:Liability insurance covers the insured's potential legal liability risk to the third party in order to guarantee the financial stability and peace of mind of the insured. When liability insurance accidents occur, litigation, arbitration and reconciliation are both the best ways to resolve the dispute, the "reconciliation" which requires a lot of negotiation and consultation between the parties is the greatest. The law of limited cost saving should be paid attention to, and in addition to the obligation of the liability insurer to fill the obligation of the loss of the insurer, based on the principle of honesty and credit, we should establish the obligation of the insurer to conciliate the liability, and realize the purpose of protecting the rights of the insured. In particular, the obligation of the liability insurer has not been involved; there is no liability for the liability of the insurer in the relevant liability insurance contract. This article, based on the relevant theories and referring to the foreign operating experience, discusses the legal attributes of the liability insurer's reconciliation obligation, the fulfillment of the content and the contral legal consequences. In order to conform to the function of the contemporary liability insurance and adapt to the principle of honesty and credit and the needs of the parties, this article includes five chapters except the introduction. The introduction proposes that the system of liability insurance should be perfected to comply with the needs of the development of the contemporary society, so as to achieve the successful maintenance of the safety and mood of the insured's property. In the first chapter of this article, after briefly introducing the understanding foundation of the liability insurer's reconciliation obligation, the basic position of the liability insurer's reconciliation obligation is mainly discussed. It advocates that the "compulsory" legislation stipulates the settlement of the liability insurer, and the leading nature of the liability insurer's settlement is the obligation, and its right attribute is embodied through its obligations; the liability insurer's obligation to reconcile is the legal obligation, and the liability insurer is the main obligation of the liability insurer, and the liability for the liability insurer is the liability of the liability insurer; When the insurer's reconciliation obligation is defined, the liability insurer should have the obligation to reconcile the insured with the third party on the basis of the principle of honesty and credit and promote the amount of compensation determined by the settlement agreement. The second chapter focuses on the implementation of the liability insurer's reconciliation obligation, including the basis of the civil agency theory; The precondition of its performance is the insurer's double notification obligation to the liability accident and the three party's claim, and the two basic matters arising from the dispute fall into the scope of the liability insurance; the way to perform is the insured, the liability insurer initiatively emits a settlement offer and the three party initiatively emits two ways of reconciliation. And in the latter, the settlement of the settlement of the latter is reasonable or not, the settlement of the principle of conflict of interest and the three specific situations (mainly reflected as the amount of the settlement offer, the difference between the amount of the lawsuit and the three parties of the liability limit) to accept or not the issue of the acceptance of the settlement, the main idea is that the "no consideration of the limitation of responsibility" is proposed by third people. To determine the standard of whether the offer is reasonable or not, the settlement offer of a conciliatory amount below the liability limit gives the insurer a complete decision to accept or not, and the ultimate responsibility is not limited to the limit of liability. On the contrary, the insured is completely determined by the insured and the liability insurer is only responsible for the liability limit. The third chapter of this article mainly discusses the responsibility of the liability insurer when it refuses to fulfill the obligation of reconciliation and does not fulfill the obligation of reconciliation. The fourth chapter refers to the fourth chapter of this article: the fourth chapter of this article is to compensate for the amount of the settlement, the cost of reconciliation and its interest, the adverse consequences of the "right to failure", and when the insurer does not fully fulfill the obligation of reconciliation. The fifth chapter is the conclusion, which includes the necessity and rationality of the establishment of the liability insurer's reconciliation obligation, and points out the significance of the research in this paper.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：武漢大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D922.284

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李明秋;責(zé)任保險(xiǎn) 正當(dāng)其時(shí)[J];安徽消防;2001年08期

2 仇春涓;抓住世博會(huì)契機(jī) 發(fā)展責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)[J];山東行政學(xué)院山東省經(jīng)濟(jì)管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年04期

3 虞光軍;水貴仙;;發(fā)展責(zé)任保險(xiǎn) 推進(jìn)“平安寧波”建設(shè)[J];寧波通訊;2004年08期

4 ;責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)和意外保險(xiǎn)[J];中國衛(wèi)生法制;2008年05期

5 李仙峰;;我國責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)初探[J];山西煤炭管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年03期

6 邱嵐;胡元佳;王一濤;;針對(duì)藥源性損害的責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)探析[J];保險(xiǎn)研究;2011年06期

7 張怡超;;學(xué)校責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)實(shí)施中的若干問題研究[J];西部法學(xué)評(píng)論;2011年05期

8 岳西寬;論責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)[J];中國青年政治學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1998年03期

9 孫文燦;;責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)為養(yǎng)老服務(wù)業(yè)發(fā)展保駕護(hù)航——解析《關(guān)于推進(jìn)養(yǎng)老機(jī)構(gòu)責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)工作的指導(dǎo)意見》[J];社會(huì)福利;2014年05期

10 ;印發(fā)關(guān)于發(fā)展責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)完善我市災(zāi)害事故防范救助體系意見的通知[J];天津政報(bào);2007年08期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前10條

1 游桂云;刁一峰;趙智慧;;責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)影響因素研究[A];2011年全國電子信息技術(shù)與應(yīng)用學(xué)術(shù)會(huì)議論文集[C];2011年

2 中國保險(xiǎn)監(jiān)督管理委員會(huì)新疆監(jiān)管局課題組;;新疆責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)發(fā)展的調(diào)研[A];中國保險(xiǎn)學(xué)會(huì)學(xué)術(shù)年會(huì)入選文集2011（調(diào)研報(bào)告卷）[C];2011年

3 潘洪文;張一萌;劉君;;搶占責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)市場(chǎng)勢(shì)在必行[A];黑龍江省保險(xiǎn)行業(yè)協(xié)會(huì)二屆理事會(huì)換屆大會(huì)暨三屆理事會(huì)一次會(huì)議文集[C];2004年

4 劉宇;;淺析責(zé)任險(xiǎn)面臨的問題及發(fā)展對(duì)策[A];2004年全國保險(xiǎn)行業(yè)協(xié)會(huì)秘書長聯(lián)席會(huì)議論文集[C];2004年

5 郭延軍;;論旅行社責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)的新發(fā)展[A];“落實(shí)科學(xué)發(fā)展觀，，又快又好發(fā)展山東保險(xiǎn)業(yè)”論文評(píng)選[C];2006年

6 吳熙;;保險(xiǎn)業(yè)應(yīng)更加自覺地?fù)?dān)當(dāng)起社會(huì)責(zé)任[A];湖南省保險(xiǎn)學(xué)會(huì)2008“保險(xiǎn)理論、政策研討會(huì)”優(yōu)秀論文集[C];2008年

7 謝并球;;淺談保險(xiǎn)業(yè)承擔(dān)社會(huì)責(zé)任的意義、內(nèi)容、方法[A];湖南省保險(xiǎn)學(xué)會(huì)2008“保險(xiǎn)理論、政策研討會(huì)”優(yōu)秀論文集[C];2008年

8 張瑞綱;許謹(jǐn)良;;責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)、社會(huì)責(zé)任與法庭訴訟——基于博弈論的分析[A];中國保險(xiǎn)學(xué)會(huì)學(xué)術(shù)年會(huì)入選文集2011（理論卷）[C];2011年

9 陳燕華;;大力發(fā)展責(zé)任險(xiǎn) 共創(chuàng)和諧社會(huì)[A];“創(chuàng)新·和諧·發(fā)展”征文頒獎(jiǎng)儀式暨保險(xiǎn)學(xué)術(shù)報(bào)告會(huì)論文集[C];2007年

10 孫祁祥;;保險(xiǎn)與社會(huì)保障:雙重角色、制度責(zé)任與挑戰(zhàn)[A];變革中的穩(wěn)�。罕ｋU(xiǎn)、社會(huì)保障與經(jīng)濟(jì)可持續(xù)發(fā)展——北大CCISSR論壇文集·2005[C];2005年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 朱俊生;責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)亟待發(fā)展[N];中國保險(xiǎn)報(bào);2003年

2 李慶明;加快責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)發(fā)展[N];中國保險(xiǎn)報(bào);2005年

3 趙琦貞;責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)大樹待栽[N];中國改革報(bào);2003年

4 記者 盧懷謙;責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)意義重大商機(jī)無限[N];中國證券報(bào);2003年

5 仇春涓;世博會(huì)引發(fā)責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)商機(jī)[N];國際金融報(bào);2004年

6 張東臣;吳定富：五方面加快發(fā)展責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)[N];中國經(jīng)濟(jì)時(shí)報(bào);2004年

7 黃桃源;大力發(fā)展責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)[N];金融時(shí)報(bào);2003年

8 本報(bào)記者 黃桃源;共同營造責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)發(fā)展環(huán)境[N];金融時(shí)報(bào);2003年

9 本報(bào)記者 黃桃源;責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)正逢發(fā)展良機(jī)[N];金融時(shí)報(bào);2004年

10 劉杰;中國將大力發(fā)展責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)[N];北京商報(bào);2006年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前6條

1 粟榆;大規(guī)模侵權(quán)責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)賠償制度研究[D];西南財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2014年

2 易萍;風(fēng)險(xiǎn)社會(huì)中我國責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)的定位與制度重構(gòu)[D];上海交通大學(xué);2014年

3 謝書云;我國責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)市場(chǎng)發(fā)展研究[D];廈門大學(xué);2008年

4 馬楠;責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)第三人請(qǐng)求權(quán)研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2009年

5 邵海;責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)影響下現(xiàn)代侵權(quán)法的嬗變[D];重慶大學(xué);2008年

6 劉嬌;機(jī)動(dòng)車交通事故損害賠償責(zé)任比較研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2012年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 馬新華;基于和諧社會(huì)構(gòu)建的責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)發(fā)展研究[D];廣西大學(xué);2008年

2 吳傳明;我國責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)的發(fā)展現(xiàn)狀及對(duì)策研究[D];廣西大學(xué);2008年

3 張亞濱;河北責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)發(fā)展策略研究[D];首都經(jīng)濟(jì)貿(mào)易大學(xué);2008年

4 閆觀博;我國責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)發(fā)展研究[D];新疆財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2009年

5 張曄;我國責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)發(fā)展的策略研究[D];天津財(cái)經(jīng)學(xué)院;2005年

6 艾厚成;我國責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)的產(chǎn)品創(chuàng)新[D];西南財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2009年

7 李瑾;我國中小學(xué)校方責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)發(fā)展研究[D];西南財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2011年

8 高銳;內(nèi)蒙古責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)發(fā)展現(xiàn)狀及對(duì)策研究[D];內(nèi)蒙古大學(xué);2011年

9 謝晶雪;養(yǎng)老機(jī)構(gòu)意外責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)探析[D];華東政法大學(xué);2012年

10 羅兵兵;完善我國中小學(xué)校方責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)的思考[D];廣西大學(xué);2013年

本文編號(hào)：1812215