【摘要】：海上保險(xiǎn)告知義務(wù)是海上保險(xiǎn)法中的重要制度之一,其能夠促進(jìn)海上保險(xiǎn)業(yè)的順利發(fā)展。這一制度存在的目的是保護(hù)海上運(yùn)輸早期處于劣勢(shì)地位的保險(xiǎn)人的利益,保證保險(xiǎn)人不會(huì)因被保險(xiǎn)人對(duì)標(biāo)的物信息披露不全面而承擔(dān)更多的責(zé)任,最終兼顧保險(xiǎn)合同雙方在合同中地位的平衡。隨著科技的發(fā)展,保險(xiǎn)人擁有足夠能力去了解保險(xiǎn)標(biāo)的的信息,雙方地位的差異性得到改善。與此同時(shí),保險(xiǎn)人為了推卸責(zé)任拒絕賠償,往往會(huì)利用自己對(duì)專業(yè)知識(shí)的掌握提出被保險(xiǎn)人違反告知義務(wù)的抗辯。這一現(xiàn)狀帶來結(jié)果是使得告知義務(wù)制度淪為了保險(xiǎn)人惡意抗辯的工具,與海上保險(xiǎn)的最大誠信原則的宗旨和原則相違背。因此,本文試圖對(duì)告知義務(wù)下保險(xiǎn)人的抗辯制度進(jìn)行研究,對(duì)保險(xiǎn)人合理抗辯進(jìn)行指引,進(jìn)而減少海上保險(xiǎn)糾紛。同時(shí)對(duì)保險(xiǎn)人的救濟(jì)方式進(jìn)行討論,避免保險(xiǎn)人隨意濫用救濟(jì)方式損害被保險(xiǎn)人的利益,并尋找最為合理的救濟(jì)方式,并對(duì)我國法下的相關(guān)規(guī)定提供一定的借鑒作用。本文運(yùn)用比較研究方法,主要是參照海上保險(xiǎn)業(yè)發(fā)達(dá)的英國《1906年海上保險(xiǎn)法》的規(guī)定及相關(guān)判例,對(duì)被保險(xiǎn)人違反告知義務(wù)時(shí)保險(xiǎn)人的抗辯制度進(jìn)行研究論文共分緒論、正文、結(jié)論三部分。其中,正文部分包括四方面內(nèi)容:第一章闡述了海上保險(xiǎn)下告知義務(wù)的基本理論,主要從告知義務(wù)的背景、定義、法律性質(zhì)以及履行主體、履行范圍、違反告知義務(wù)造成的法律后果等幾方面解析,作為全文的基礎(chǔ)。第二章是本文的重點(diǎn),未告知是保險(xiǎn)人援用最為頻繁的抗辯,主要從認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)方面分析保險(xiǎn)人的抗辯,包括客觀方面的“重要情況”認(rèn)定和主觀方面的“知悉或應(yīng)當(dāng)知悉”規(guī)則,對(duì)客觀層面進(jìn)行論述時(shí)主要借鑒英國法下的“決定性影響”標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、“純粹性影響”標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、“謹(jǐn)慎保險(xiǎn)人”標(biāo)準(zhǔn)以及實(shí)際誘導(dǎo)規(guī)則,并對(duì)各種標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的利弊進(jìn)行分析。第三章主要是法律對(duì)保險(xiǎn)人抗辯的限制即從棄權(quán)和禁止反言兩方面進(jìn)行論述。該章論述主要是對(duì)保險(xiǎn)人濫用抗辯的限制性規(guī)定,平衡保險(xiǎn)合同雙方的利益。第四章是對(duì)保險(xiǎn)人抗辯的救濟(jì)方式的探討,保險(xiǎn)人的救濟(jì)模式經(jīng)歷了從傳統(tǒng)到現(xiàn)代的改變。通過分析各種救濟(jì)模式對(duì)我國《海商法》下的保險(xiǎn)人救濟(jì)方式提供借鑒,完善我國《海商法》第223條的規(guī)定。
[Abstract]:The obligation to inform marine insurance is one of the important systems in marine insurance law, which can promote the smooth development of marine insurance industry. The purpose of this system is to protect the interests of the underwriters who were at a disadvantage in the early stage of maritime transport, and to ensure that the insurer will not assume more responsibility for the incomplete disclosure of the subject-matter information by the insured. Finally, the balance of the position of the two parties in the contract is taken into account. With the development of science and technology, the insurer has enough ability to understand the information of the subject matter of insurance, and the difference between the two sides is improved. At the same time, in order to shirk the responsibility and refuse to compensate, the insurer often makes use of its own professional knowledge to raise the defense that the insured violates the obligation of informing. The result of the present situation is that the obligation of notification becomes the instrument of the insurer's malicious defense, which is contrary to the tenet and principle of the principle of maximum good faith of marine insurance. Therefore, this paper attempts to study the defense system of the insurer under the obligation of notification, and to guide the insurer's reasonable defense so as to reduce the maritime insurance disputes. At the same time, the relief way of the insurer is discussed to avoid the insurer from harming the insurant's interests by abusing the relief method at will, and to find the most reasonable relief method, and to provide some reference for the relevant provisions under the law of our country. This paper applies comparative research methods, mainly referring to the provisions of the British Marine Insurance Law of 1906 and relevant cases, and carries on the research on the defense system of the insured in case of breach of the obligation of informing, which is divided into two parts: introduction, main text, Conclusion three parts. Among them, the text part includes four aspects: the first chapter describes the basic theory of the obligation of notification under marine insurance, mainly from the background, definition, legal nature, the subject of performance, the scope of performance. The legal consequences caused by breach of the obligation of notification are analyzed as the basis of the full text. The second chapter is the focus of this article, not informing the insurer is the most frequently used defense, mainly from the identification of the standard analysis of the insurer's defense, Including "important information" in objective aspect and "know or ought to know" rule in subjective aspect. When dealing with objective aspect, it mainly draws lessons from the "decisive influence" standard and "pure influence" standard under British law. The standard of "prudent insurer" and the practical inducement rule, and the advantages and disadvantages of these standards are analyzed. The third chapter mainly discusses the limitation of the insurer's defense from two aspects: abstaining and estoppel. This chapter mainly deals with the restrictive provisions of the insurer's abuse of defences, balancing the interests of both sides of the insurance contract. The fourth chapter discusses the relief mode of the insurer's defense, the relief mode of the insurer has changed from tradition to modern. Through the analysis of various relief modes to provide reference for the insurer relief under the Maritime Law of China, the article 223 of the Maritime Law of China is perfected.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：遼寧大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D922.284

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 任自力;;保險(xiǎn)法最大誠信原則之審思[J];法學(xué)家;2010年03期

2 黃羽芳;;對(duì)《海商法》第222條的再思考[J];法制與社會(huì);2010年18期

3 劉久;;論英國海上保險(xiǎn)法最大誠信原則之發(fā)展[J];法制與社會(huì);2013年04期

4 朱作賢,李東;論修改《海商法》應(yīng)否補(bǔ)充規(guī)定英國模式的“最大誠信原則”——兼對(duì)海上保險(xiǎn)法最大誠信原則的反思[J];中國海商法年刊;2003年00期

5 傅廷中;谷浩;;海上保險(xiǎn)立法的國際協(xié)調(diào):基礎(chǔ)、現(xiàn)狀和障礙[J];中國海商法年刊;2005年00期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 呂冕;論海上保險(xiǎn)被保險(xiǎn)人告知義務(wù)及其變革趨勢(shì)[D];大連海事大學(xué);2008年

2 陳艷麗;海上保險(xiǎn)法下被保險(xiǎn)人未告知責(zé)任及其變革[D];大連海事大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號(hào)：2205062