【摘要】：海上責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)是以海上責(zé)任為保險(xiǎn)標(biāo)的的保險(xiǎn)的總稱，屬于海上保險(xiǎn)。中國海上責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)，簡而言之，是指以《海商法》第218條列明的“對第三人責(zé)任”為保險(xiǎn)標(biāo)的的保險(xiǎn)。 調(diào)整我國海上責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)的法律規(guī)范為《海商法》中關(guān)于海上保險(xiǎn)合同的規(guī)定，《海商法》未做規(guī)定的，適用《保險(xiǎn)法》的相關(guān)規(guī)定。但是，綜觀上述法律規(guī)范，當(dāng)其適用于海上責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)時(shí)，在實(shí)踐中就會(huì)產(chǎn)生諸多不和諧之處，導(dǎo)致當(dāng)事人在其中的法律地位無法明確，產(chǎn)生的問題無法妥善解決�？梢哉f，相對于我國海上責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)實(shí)踐的蓬勃發(fā)展，相應(yīng)的法律規(guī)范以及法律理論研究越來越顯示出不完善的一面。 為了加強(qiáng)相關(guān)的法律理論研究，完善相關(guān)的法律規(guī)范，筆者通過綜合運(yùn)用歷史研究法、語義分析法和對比研究法等研究方法，對海上責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)實(shí)踐及其適用規(guī)則(或法律規(guī)范)的互動(dòng)規(guī)律和演進(jìn)趨勢、海上責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)的法律性質(zhì)、海上責(zé)任與船舶、貨物或運(yùn)費(fèi)等客體被定性為保險(xiǎn)標(biāo)的過程中法律推理的區(qū)別以及我國現(xiàn)行法律規(guī)范中存在的疏漏或不恰當(dāng)之處進(jìn)行了初步的整理、分析和研究。 在海上責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)領(lǐng)域，相關(guān)規(guī)則或法律規(guī)范以及法律理論與相應(yīng)的實(shí)踐之間呈現(xiàn)出一種有機(jī)的互動(dòng)關(guān)系，二者相輔相成，互相促進(jìn)，共同經(jīng)歷了一個(gè)從無到有，從不完善到逐漸完善的發(fā)展歷程。目前，隨著我國海上責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)實(shí)踐的繁榮發(fā)展，相應(yīng)的法律規(guī)范和法律理論正亟待完善。 面對我國現(xiàn)行法律規(guī)范無法妥善的適用于海上責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)實(shí)踐的問題，筆者認(rèn)為，從法律理論方面來說，海上責(zé)任雖然與船舶、貨物等均被《海商法》第218條定性為保險(xiǎn)標(biāo)的，但是，海上責(zé)任被定性為保險(xiǎn)標(biāo)的過程中的法律推理與船舶、貨物等其他客體被定性為保險(xiǎn)標(biāo)的過程中的法律推理是不同的。問題產(chǎn)生的原因就在于這兩種法律推理之間的區(qū)別被忽視了。具體而言，海上責(zé)任之所以被定性為保險(xiǎn)標(biāo)的是因?yàn)槠浔旧硎且环N損失，當(dāng)其處于海上風(fēng)險(xiǎn)之下時(shí)，就會(huì)因?yàn)樵庥龊Ｉ巷L(fēng)險(xiǎn)而產(chǎn)生；海上保險(xiǎn)合同的目的就是為其不發(fā)生提供保障。而船舶、貨物等其他客體被定性為保險(xiǎn)標(biāo)的是因?yàn)槠浔旧硎且环N權(quán)利或經(jīng)濟(jì)利益，當(dāng)其處于海上風(fēng)險(xiǎn)之下時(shí)，就會(huì)因?yàn)樵庥龊Ｉ巷L(fēng)險(xiǎn)而受損；海上保險(xiǎn)合同的目的就是為其保全提供保障。這個(gè)理論或可稱為“保險(xiǎn)標(biāo)的定性過程理論”，是本文的核心理論。 根據(jù)上述理論，筆者對相關(guān)法律規(guī)范進(jìn)行了初步的分析，解釋了其適用于海上責(zé) 任保險(xiǎn)實(shí)踐時(shí)產(chǎn)生問題的原因，并相應(yīng)提出了解決問題的初步建議，以期明確當(dāng)事人 的法律地位，，妥善解決實(shí)踐中出現(xiàn)的問題，為我國海上責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)的健康發(fā)展略進(jìn)綿薄 之力。
[Abstract]:Marine liability insurance is a general term of insurance with marine liability as the subject matter of insurance, which belongs to marine insurance. Chinese marine liability insurance, in short, refers to the "liability to third parties" listed in Article 218 of Maritime Law as the subject matter of insurance. In order to adjust the legal norm of marine liability insurance of our country to the provisions of maritime insurance contract in Maritime Law, the relevant provisions of Insurance Law shall apply to those that are not stipulated in Maritime Law. However, when the above legal norms are applied to marine liability insurance, there will be a lot of disharmony in practice, which leads to the parties' legal status in which can not be clear, and the problems can not be solved properly. It can be said that, compared with the vigorous development of marine liability insurance practice in China, the corresponding legal norms and legal theory research more and more show an imperfect side. In order to strengthen the relevant legal theoretical research and perfect the relevant legal norms, the author uses the historical research method, the semantic analysis method and the comparative research method, etc. The interactive law and evolution trend of the practice of marine liability insurance and its applicable rules (or legal norms), the legal nature of marine liability insurance, marine liability and ships, The difference between legal reasoning in the process of insurance and the omission or inappropriateness existing in the current legal norms of our country are preliminarily sorted, analyzed and studied as the object of goods or freight is defined as the subject matter of insurance. In the field of marine liability insurance, there is an organic interactive relationship between the relevant rules or legal norms, legal theory and corresponding practice. They complement each other, promote each other, and experience from scratch to existence together. The course of development from imperfection to gradual perfection. At present, with the prosperous development of marine liability insurance practice in China, the corresponding legal norms and legal theories need to be improved. In the face of the problem that the current legal norms of our country can not be properly applied to the practice of marine liability insurance, the author believes that, in terms of legal theory, although maritime liability and ships and goods are classified as the subject of insurance by Article 218 of the Maritime Law, However, the legal reasoning in the process of defining marine liability as the subject matter of insurance is different from that of other objects, such as ships and goods, which are characterized as the subject matter of insurance. The reason for the problem lies in the fact that the distinction between the two kinds of legal reasoning is ignored. Specifically, marine liability is characterized as the subject of insurance because it itself is a loss, when it is under the risk of the sea, it will come into being because of the risk at sea. The purpose of a marine insurance contract is to provide protection against its occurrence. The other objects, such as ship, cargo and so on, are classified as the subject of insurance because they are a kind of right or economic benefit, and when they are under the risk of the sea, they will be damaged because of the risk at sea. The purpose of a marine insurance contract is to provide protection for its preservation. This theory may be called "the qualitative process theory of insurance mark", which is the core theory of this paper. According to the above theory, the author makes a preliminary analysis of the relevant legal norms, and explains the reasons for the problems in the practice of marine liability insurance. And put forward corresponding preliminary suggestions to solve the problem, in order to clarify the legal status of the parties, and properly solve the problems in practice, For the healthy development of China's marine liability insurance slightly forward a modest force.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海海事大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2004
【分類號】：D922.294;D922.284

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 殷悅;海上人身傷亡損害賠償法律問題研究[D];武漢大學(xué);2009年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前8條

1 王璐;海上責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)第三人直接請求權(quán)制度研究[D];哈爾濱工程大學(xué);2010年

2 楊雪;海盜贖金的保險(xiǎn)賠償責(zé)任研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2010年

3 張麗芳;海上自愿責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)第三人對保險(xiǎn)人權(quán)利研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2011年

4 張春穎;論船員人身傷亡損害賠償直訴制度的建立[D];大連海事大學(xué);2011年

5 武利海;海上強(qiáng)制責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)第三人直接請求權(quán)問題研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2011年

6 茍菁;論《海商法》218條第三人與海上責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)合同[D];大連海事大學(xué);2006年

7 王建蘭;海上責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)中第三人直接請求權(quán)制度研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2008年

8 楊云君;海上責(zé)任保險(xiǎn)第三人直接請求權(quán)制度研究[D];廣東外語外貿(mào)大學(xué);2009年

本文編號：2175289