本文選題：海上保險 + 防災(zāi)防損制度��； 參考：《大連海事大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：保險的功能不僅在于損失賠償,還在于防災(zāi)防損。然而,長期以來,防災(zāi)防損制度沒有得到足夠的重視,相關(guān)研究更是一度淪為理論盲區(qū)。而海上保險又具有特殊性。因此,海上保險中防災(zāi)防損制度的構(gòu)建不僅要解決防災(zāi)防損制度現(xiàn)存的問題,還應(yīng)結(jié)合海上保險的特殊性,作進一步優(yōu)化。因此,本文的研究,一方面是為了填補學(xué)術(shù)空白；另一方面也是為了構(gòu)建一套切實可行的制度,以滿足實踐的需求。本文通過運用社會實證分析方法中的比較法研究方法、邏輯實證分析方法、語義分析方法等法學(xué)研究方法,得出以下主要結(jié)論：1.在私法層面上,保險人的防災(zāi)防損工作仍是一項約定義務(wù)。然而,保險合同往往賦予保險人權(quán)利,而不是課以其義務(wù)。因此,實踐中,保險人行使檢查權(quán)及建議權(quán)是進行防災(zāi)防損工作的主要形式。此外,保險合同也通常不規(guī)定保險人未及時行使上述權(quán)利的法律后果。然而,禁反言原則只適用于保險人未及時行使建議權(quán)的情況,而不能適用于保險人未及時行使檢查權(quán)的情況。因此,合同仍有必要進一步明確保險人未及時進行檢查權(quán)的法律后果。2.被保險人的防災(zāi)防損義務(wù)也是一項約定義務(wù)。若被保險人履行了防災(zāi)防損義務(wù),原則上由此產(chǎn)生的費用應(yīng)由其獨自承擔(dān),但是在緊迫危險中產(chǎn)生的額外且合理的費用應(yīng)可從保險人處受償。若被保險人違反了防災(zāi)防損義務(wù),在損失產(chǎn)生之前,保險人可以增加保險費或解除保險合同；在損失產(chǎn)生之后,保險人甚至可以拒絕賠償。然而,無論是何種救濟權(quán)的行使,都應(yīng)滿足相應(yīng)條件。3.限定承保風(fēng)險條款、除外責(zé)任條款、危險增加時的通知義務(wù)條款、保證條款均可作為規(guī)定被保險人防災(zāi)防損義務(wù)的其他模式。然而,在采用這些模式時,應(yīng)避免與防災(zāi)防損義務(wù)的立法目的相沖突。尤其是通過保證條款規(guī)定防災(zāi)防損義務(wù)時,相關(guān)規(guī)定宜細(xì)不宜粗。
[Abstract]:The function of insurance not only lies in the loss compensation, but also in the disaster prevention. However, for a long time, the system of disaster prevention and loss prevention has not been paid enough attention to. And marine insurance has its particularity. Therefore, the construction of disaster prevention and loss prevention system in marine insurance should not only solve the existing problems of disaster prevention and loss prevention system, but also combine the particularity of marine insurance to make further optimization. Therefore, on the one hand, the purpose of this study is to fill the academic gap; on the other hand, to build a practical system to meet the needs of practice. By using the comparative method, the logical empirical analysis method and the semantic analysis method in the social empirical analysis, this paper draws the following main conclusions: 1: 1. In the level of private law, the insurer's disaster prevention and loss prevention work is still a contractual obligation. However, insurance contracts tend to give the insurer rights, not lessons from its obligations. Therefore, in practice, the insurer exercise the right of inspection and suggestion is the main form of disaster prevention and loss prevention. In addition, insurance contracts usually do not stipulate the legal consequences of the insurer's failure to exercise these rights in a timely manner. However, the principle of estoppel is only applicable to the situation where the insurer has not exercised the right of suggestion in time, but not in the case of the insurer not exercising the right of inspection in time. Therefore, it is still necessary to further clarify the legal consequences of the insurer's failure to carry out timely inspection. The insurant's duty of disaster prevention and loss prevention is also an agreed obligation. If the insured fulfills the duty of prevention and loss prevention, the expenses arising therefrom shall, in principle, be borne by him alone, but the extra and reasonable expenses arising from the imminent danger shall be reimbursed from the insurer. If the insured violates the obligation to prevent disaster and prevent loss, the insurer may increase the insurance premium or cancel the insurance contract before the loss; after the loss, the insurer can even refuse to compensate. However, no matter what kind of relief right to exercise, should meet the corresponding conditions. 3. The clause of limiting insurance against risk, the clause of excluding liability, the clause of obligation of notice when the risk increases, and the clause of guarantee can be used as other modes of stipulating the duty of prevention and prevention of disaster and loss of the insured. However, in adopting these models, conflict with the legislative purpose of the duty to prevent and prevent loss should be avoided. Especially through the provisions of the provisions on disaster prevention and loss prevention obligations, the relevant provisions should be fine rather than rough.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：大連海事大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：D922.284

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 葉名怡;;重大過失理論的構(gòu)建[J];法學(xué)研究;2009年06期

2 馬寧;;保險法中保證制度構(gòu)造及其現(xiàn)代化轉(zhuǎn)型——以英國為視角[J];環(huán)球法律評論;2011年01期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 朱作賢;海上保險法補償原則研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2009年

，

本文編號：1848592