本文選題：交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn) + 免責(zé)��； 參考：《吉林大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)免責(zé)條款是指由于出現(xiàn)法律法規(guī)規(guī)定或保險(xiǎn)合同約定的情形,保險(xiǎn)公司對(duì)在此情形下原本屬于交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)賠償范圍內(nèi)的受害人損失免予賠償或附條件進(jìn)行賠償?shù)囊?guī)定。交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)的商業(yè)性、射幸性以及防范道德風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的需要,決定了交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)免責(zé)條款產(chǎn)生。由于我國(guó)交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)免責(zé)條款零散規(guī)定在不同法律規(guī)范中,且規(guī)范不夠明確具體,導(dǎo)致我國(guó)對(duì)交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)免責(zé)情形、賠償范圍等方面認(rèn)識(shí)不統(tǒng)一,并最終導(dǎo)致“同案不同判”的法律亂象。2012年1 2月21日開始實(shí)施的《最高人民法院關(guān)于審理道路交通事故損害賠償案件適用法律若干問題的解釋》對(duì)交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)免責(zé)條款作出了新的規(guī)定,在一定程度上解決了“同案不同判”的法律問題,但交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)免責(zé)條款在某些方面仍存在著一定問題:現(xiàn)行法律規(guī)范對(duì)于免責(zé)條款規(guī)定不統(tǒng)一,會(huì)導(dǎo)致不同的機(jī)構(gòu)以及事故中的各方當(dāng)事人對(duì)免責(zé)條款不同理解,使免責(zé)條款在適用的過程中仍會(huì)出現(xiàn)混亂的局面;我國(guó)設(shè)置免責(zé)條款所追求目的是促進(jìn)道路交通安全,但在其行使過程中對(duì)保險(xiǎn)公司賠償所規(guī)定的相關(guān)限制,會(huì)直接損害交通事故受害人獲得賠償?shù)哪芰?違背了交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)對(duì)當(dāng)事人進(jìn)行保護(hù)的首要立法目的,導(dǎo)致立法目的沖突,同時(shí)免責(zé)條款所引發(fā)對(duì)受害人保護(hù)程度的不同,也違背法律基本原則——公平原則;在免責(zé)情形下,保險(xiǎn)公司根據(jù)法律規(guī)定承擔(dān)原本不應(yīng)承擔(dān)的賠償責(zé)任的同時(shí),法律也賦予了保險(xiǎn)公司在承擔(dān)責(zé)任后,對(duì)侵權(quán)人享有進(jìn)行追償?shù)臋?quán)利。但因該項(xiàng)追償權(quán)法律規(guī)范的缺失以及保險(xiǎn)公司出于訴訟成本的考慮,導(dǎo)致保險(xiǎn)公司往往怠于行使追償權(quán),這一方面造成保險(xiǎn)公司的實(shí)際損失,另一方面使實(shí)際侵權(quán)人逃脫了相應(yīng)的制裁,未能受到應(yīng)有懲罰,不利于社會(huì)公平正義的實(shí)現(xiàn)。本文在研究分析相關(guān)國(guó)家和地區(qū)交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)及免責(zé)條款之后,通過具體案例分析得出結(jié)論,在關(guān)于交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)免責(zé)條款的相關(guān)規(guī)定沖突時(shí),因司法解釋在司法實(shí)踐中的效力優(yōu)勢(shì)以及所具有的其他優(yōu)勢(shì),應(yīng)當(dāng)優(yōu)先適用《最高人民法院關(guān)于審理道路交通事故損害賠償案件適用法律若干問題的解釋》,并建議應(yīng)當(dāng)對(duì)《機(jī)動(dòng)車交通事故責(zé)任強(qiáng)制保險(xiǎn)條例》關(guān)于免責(zé)條款的規(guī)定予以修改,使有關(guān)免責(zé)條款的法律規(guī)定相一致,并達(dá)到相互銜接、統(tǒng)一的狀態(tài),為法院審理免責(zé)情形下交通事故時(shí)統(tǒng)一裁判尺度提供法律依據(jù);在免責(zé)條款引發(fā)交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)立法目的沖突時(shí),我們應(yīng)當(dāng)始終堅(jiān)持對(duì)受害人的保護(hù)為首要立法目的。在免責(zé)情形下,保險(xiǎn)公司應(yīng)當(dāng)?shù)谝豁樜怀袚?dān)受害人的人身?yè)p害賠償責(zé)任,無論實(shí)際侵權(quán)人是否先期進(jìn)行了賠償。通過減少免責(zé)情形下保險(xiǎn)公司賠償?shù)南拗?來避免立法目的沖突的發(fā)生,同時(shí)實(shí)現(xiàn)交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)對(duì)受害人的平等保護(hù);通過完善相關(guān)立法和改變追償方式的手段,來保障保險(xiǎn)公司追償權(quán)的行使;隨著影響交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)相關(guān)因素不斷改善,逐步剔除交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)中免責(zé)條款的規(guī)定。
[Abstract]:The exemption clause of strong insurance refers to the stipulations of the insurance company to compensate for the loss of the victim, or the conditions attached to the conditions stipulated in the law or regulation or the insurance contract, for the loss of damages or the conditions attached to the victim within the scope of the compensation in this case. Due to the fragmentary provision of the exemption clause in China's strong insurance policy in different legal norms, and the specification is not clear and specific, it causes our country to disagree on the circumstances of disclaimer and the scope of compensation, and eventually leads to the legal disorder of "the different judgments of the same case" in the "Supreme People's court" which began to be implemented in December 21st.2012. Some questions about the application of law on the cases of compensation for road traffic accident damages are explained, and new regulations have been made to the exemption clause of strong insurance. To a certain extent, the legal problems of the "different cases of the same case" are solved, but there are still some problems in some aspects of the exemptions clauses of the high risk insurance. Disunity will lead to different understandings of disclaimer clauses in different organizations and parties in the accident, and there will still be confusion in the process of application of disclaimer; the purpose of setting exemption clauses in our country is to promote road traffic safety, but the relevant restrictions on the compensation of insurance companies in the course of its exercise will be limited. The ability to directly damage the compensation for the victims of a traffic accident violates the primary legislative purpose of the protection of the parties to the parties, which leads to the conflict of the legislative purpose. At the same time, the protection degree of the victims caused by the exemption clauses is different, and the basic principle of the law is contrary to the basic principle of the law. In the case of disclaimer, the insurance company is according to the law rules. The law also endows the insurance company with the right of recourse to the infringer when it is liable for compensation, but the loss of the legal norm of the right of recourse and the consideration of the cost of the insurance company often cause the insurance company to exercise the right of recourse, in this respect, the insurance company is insured. The actual loss of the company, on the other hand, makes the actual infringer escape the corresponding sanctions and is not punished and is not conducive to the realization of social fairness and justice. In a sudden, the judicial interpretation of the effectiveness and other advantages of the judicial practice should be given priority to the interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the application of laws on the trial of compensation cases for road traffic accidents, and it is suggested that the regulations on compulsory insurance for vehicle traffic accidents should be stipulated in the provisions of the exemption clause. It will be amended to make the legal provisions of the disclaimer provisions consistent, and to achieve a state of cohesion and unity, and provide the legal basis for the court to unify the judgment of the traffic accident in the case of disclaimer. When the exemption clause triggers the conflict of the legislative purpose, we should always adhere to the protection of the victims as the primary legislative purpose. In the case of disclaimer, the insurance company should bear the liability of the victim's personal injury in the first place, regardless of whether the actual infringer has made the compensation in advance. By reducing the limitation of the indemnity of the insurance company under the circumstances of reducing the exemption, to avoid the occurrence of the conflict of the legislative purpose, and to realize the equal protection of the strong risk to the victim; and through the perfect phase. The legislation and the means of changing the way of recourse will be used to guarantee the exercise of the right of recourse of the insurance company; with the continuous improvement of the related factors affecting the strong insurance, the provisions of the exemption clauses in the insurance are gradually eliminated.

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

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前5條

1 張斯琪;交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)免責(zé)條款適用法律問題研究[D];內(nèi)蒙古大學(xué);2013年

2 王濰;論交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)的保險(xiǎn)責(zé)任免除[D];中國(guó)海洋大學(xué);2013年

3 游雨迪;我國(guó)交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)免責(zé)條款的法律問題研究[D];南昌大學(xué);2013年

4 辛敏江;機(jī)動(dòng)車交通事故責(zé)任強(qiáng)制保險(xiǎn)免責(zé)問題研究[D];東北財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2011年

5 楊夢(mèng)靈;交強(qiáng)險(xiǎn)免責(zé)條款法律問題研究[D];中南大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號(hào)：1878223