Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/158194
|
| Title: | 要保人、被保險人喪失保險保障之主觀要件與其一致性
Subjective Requirements of Losing Pretection of Insured and the Consistency |
| Authors: | 葉啟洲 |
| Contributors: | 法律系 |
| Keywords: | 主觀除外危險;告知義務;危險增加;特約條款;救助義務
subjective exclusion;duty of disclosure;increase of hazard;warranty;duty of salvage |
| Date: | 2019-11 |
| Issue Date: | 2025-07-31 15:48:19 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 保險契約的訂立與履行的過程中，要保人或被保險人的故意或過失行為，可能會導致其喪失保險保障。其次，依法或依契約約定，要保人與被保險人也負有多種作為或不作為的義務，例如訂約時的據實說明義務、危險增加的通知義務、遵守特約條款的義務、危險發生後的通知義務與救助義務等。此等義務的違反，可能使要保人與被保險人喪失一部或全部的保險保障。但保險法對於要保人與被保險人履行此等義務的注意標準，並不一致。有時以故意為要件，有時又以過失為要件。保險法對於要保人與被保險人喪失保險保障之主觀要件的差別處理，是否存在一定的規則？是否具有正當且充分的理由？保險人免責事由主觀要件的規範與保險法第29條第2項規定主觀除外危險之間，是否應有連結關係？上述問題對於要保人與被保險人的權益保障至為重要。德國於2008年保險契約法全盤修正前，對於上述問題也沒有一致的處理原則，但2008年全盤修法之後，則對於要保人因故意或過失違反各種義務的法律效果，採取了一致的處理原則，但也保留些許例外。此一發展對臺灣有沒有參考的價值，值得進一步探究。本研究計畫將對上述問題進行整合性的研究，探討在立法論上將要保人與被保險人喪失權利的主觀要件一致化的可能性，並提出具體建議，作為將來修正保險法的參考。
During the conclusion and performance of insurance contract, the behavior made by proposer or insured deliberately or negligently, may make the proposer or insured forfeit the protection from insurance. Besides, according to insurance act or agreement in insurance contract, proposer or insured also has kinds of duties concerning act or omission, such as duty of disclosure during the conclusion, duty of notification of risk increasing, duty to follow the warranty, duty to notify insurer of insured event and duty of salvage after the insured event happens, etc. If these duties were breached, proposer and insured may forfeit all or part of protection from insurance. Nevertheless, the criterion to judge whether prosper or insured breaches these duties are different. Sometimes it requires the prosper or insured to be deliberate, sometimes it only requires the prosper or insured to be negligent. Here come the questions, whether there is any rule or any reasonable and appropriate basis for insurance act to have different subjective requirements to deprive prosper or insured of the protection from insurance, and whether there is any connection between the rule concerning the subjective element for insurer to free from its duty and subjective exclusion under insurance act article 29 paragraph 2. These questions are important to the rights of prosper and insured. There was no consistent principle to answer the questions above in Germany, before the insurance contract law was totally amended in 2008. However, following the amendment in 2008, there is a consistent principle about the legal effects regarding prosper breaches various duties, but some exceptions as well. It is worth to study, whether the development in Germany valuable for Taiwan to refer. This research plan is going to process a systemic study on the question above, and to discuss, whether it is possible to uniform the subjective element for the forfeit of prosper and insured in legislation. This plan will also make some concrete suggestions to be the reference for amendment of insurance act in the future |
| Relation: | 科技部, MOST107-2410-H004-049, 107.08-108.07 |
| Data Type: | report |
| Appears in Collections: | [法律學系] 國科會研究計畫
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| index.html | | 0Kb | HTML | 37 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
