English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 92720/123072 (75%)
Visitors : 26956860      Online Users : 387
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    政大機構典藏 > 法學院 > 法律學系 > 期刊論文 >  Item 140.119/81816
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/81816

    Title: 從「全有全無」到「或多或少」--以德國保險契約法上約定行為義務法制之改革為中心
    Other Titles: From "all-or-nothing" to "more-or-less": Reform of Regulation on Contractual Obligations in German Insurance Contract Act
    Authors: 葉啟洲
    Yeh, Chi-Chou
    Contributors: 法學院
    Keywords: 全有全無原則;行為義務;因果關係;解除權;終止權;除外危險;損害防阻;特約條款
    All-or-nothing Principal;Contractual Obligation;Causation;Rescind,Exclusions;Loss Prevention;Special Provision
    Date: 2014-03
    Issue Date: 2016-03-04 17:35:08 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 在保險關係中,保險人經常以條款約定要保人負有說明、協力或採取避免危險發生的特定行為義務。基於對價平衡原則與誠信原則,課予要保人適當的行為義務,固屬妥當。但保險條款中約定的義務違反效果,經常使得保險人得以免責或解除契約,進而使要保人或被保險人喪失全部保障,有過於嚴苛之嫌。此時除了由法院對保險條款公平性進行內容控制之外,主要的規制方法為在保險法上就約定行為義務的要件或違反效果,設立強制性的規範,以提供要保人及被保險人最低限度的保障。德國舊保險契約法雖禁止保險人解除契約,但仍以「全有全無原則」作為規範基礎,要保人或被保險人若非獲得全額的保險給付,就是保險人完全免責。二○○八年新法則揚棄了此一原則,改採酌減給付之原則,對於要保人與被保險人的權益保障有顯著的提升。類似的問題在我國若依「特約條款」的規定,保險人亦得解除契約而不負責任,要保人或被保險人之地位較德國修法前之情況更為不利,顯有改善之空間。本文擬以德國法的修正與其實施經驗為主要研究課題,進而從比較法的觀點提出我國法將來可能的修正方向。
    In insurance relation, it is a commam senerio that the insurer apply special provision to impose the duty of disclosure, collaboration and loss prevention obligations on the insured. It is reasonable to impose these obligations based on the principle of equivalence and utmost good faith on the insured. Conversely, the consequence of violating the provision by losing all the coverage might be too harsh for the policyholder. In other words, the insurer would be completely exempt or has the right to rescind the contract. Apart from filing the lawsuit to claim a term void, the most proficient way is to offer the insured a minimum protection, by establishing a compulsory regulation on breaching effect and the conduct requirements in the insurance law. The old German insurance law had banned the insurer to rescind the contract, however, the old regulation still consider "all or nothing" as an essence principle; Briefly, the insured will either get the full compensation or nothing. In 2008, the new insurance law amended "all or nothing principle" and adopted the "more or less principle" for the sake of the consumer protection. Similar problems in Taiwan will be a different story, due to the "special provisions" (Taiwan insurance law article 66 to 69), if the insured violate the provision, the insurer can rescind the contract and negated the obligation. Need less to say, the Taiwanese policyholder is in a comparatively adverse condition. This essay will focuses on the German amendment law and the practical experiences to provide the overall perspective for future reference.
    Relation: 政大法學評論, 140, 223-286
    Data Type: article
    DOI 連結: http://dx.doi.org/10.3966/102398202015030140004
    DOI: 10.3966/102398202015030140004
    Appears in Collections:[法律學系] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    223286.pdf1780KbAdobe PDF237View/Open

    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

    社群 sharing

    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback