保险合同告知义务初探

发布时间：2018-03-13 23:18

本文选题：告知义务　切入点：先合同义务　出处：《山东大学》2012年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：在我国,保险业已经成为国民经济重要组成部分,而保险业在箭速发展的同时也出现诸多问题。其中“保险业的失信”是其中最为严重的问题之一。在此背景下笔者以合同法原理为指导、参考国内外的先进立法,通过比较保险实务和司法判例,分别从告知义务的理论基础\性质及概念、基本范畴等基础理论为入口,再进一步深入到违反告知义务的法律后果、违反告知义务的认定标准、法律救济途径以及保险人的配合义务等方面,将告知义务进行全面的探讨和研究。本文包括四章内容,第一章主要论述了告知义务的理论基础—最大诚信原则以及此原则与保险合同之间的关系,即“保险合同是高度诚信合同”。此外还论述对被保险人的“告知义务进行立法的限制”的必要性。第二章主要论述了告知义务的概念和性质。指出这种在订立保险合同之前投保人向告知义务人所尽的告知义务,属于先合同义务,具有法定性,违反此义务,告知义务人即构成违约,应承担保险合同被解除的不利后果。同时笔者分别比较了告知义务与投保人、被保险人的通知义务、告知义务与投保人和被保险人的保证义务的异同。并指出告知义务与保证义务和说明义务在履行主体、义务受领客体及行为宗旨上的相同之处和在履行义务时间、履行目的以及性质方面与二者的不同。第三章内容主要包含对告知义务基本范畴的分析解构。在第一节讨论告知义务的主体时,论述了被保险人和受益人是否应归入告知义务的主体。并得出“应以二者是否知悉合同存在为前提,具体分析”的结论。在告知义务履行时间一节中,笔者以“如何确定保险合同成立时”为重点,论述了时间确立方法、各国保险法有关此项的学说以及如出现“合同续约”、“合同变更”情形时,如何对告知义务做特殊处理。在第三节中,则以历史的发展为纵轴以各国保险状况为横轴分析了“主动告知制”与“询问告知制”两种告知义务履行方式以及与我国保险业中此项的对比。在第四节中对于告知义务的论述中,提出了对告知事实的四项认定标准,以及对重要事实的主观认定。第五节则介绍告知义务的免除。论述了当发生“保险人未询问的事实”、“保险人已知悉的事实”、“危险程度减少的事实”时,为什么要免除告知义务人的法律责任以及我国和英国、韩国、日本在此方面的规定和评价,。论文的最后部分论述了告知义务的违反。分别从如何通过主观要件及客观要件判断此种违反以及告知义务违反时,保险人的保费应否退还,退还多少、双方责任比例等。接下来,笔者也引入了对投保人有利的“不可抗辩”条款,论述了不可抗辩条款起源、发展,在我国的适用情况及价值。在最后的结语中,作者总结了前文论证中我国保险法立法的缺陷并提出保险法修改建议。
[Abstract]:In China, the insurance industry has become an important part of the national economy, and the insurance industry has also appeared many problems in the rapid development of the insurance industry, among which "the breach of credit in the insurance industry" is one of the most serious problems. Under this background, the author, guided by the principle of contract law, referring to the advanced legislation at home and abroad, through comparing insurance practice and judicial precedent, respectively from the theoretical basis, nature and concept of obligation of disclosure, basic category and other basic theories as the entrance. Further deeper into the legal consequences of breach of the obligation of notification, breach of the obligation of notification of the identification of the standard, legal remedies and the insurer's obligation to cooperate, the obligation to inform will be comprehensively discussed and studied. This paper includes four chapters. The first chapter mainly discusses the theoretical basis of the obligation of disclosure-the principle of maximum good faith and the relationship between this principle and the insurance contract. That is, "insurance contract is a high degree of good faith contract". In addition, the necessity of legislative restriction on the insured's "obligation to inform" is also discussed. The second chapter mainly discusses the concept and nature of the obligation of notification, and points out that the obligation of informing the insured to the notifying obligor before the conclusion of the insurance contract belongs to the obligation of prior contract, which is legally qualified and violates this obligation. The notifier shall bear the adverse consequences of the termination of the insurance contract. At the same time, the author compares the obligation of notification with that of the policyholder and the insured. The similarities and differences between the obligation of informing and the obligation of warranty of the insured and the insured, and the points out that the obligation of informing, the obligation of surety and the obligation of explanation are the same in the subject of performance, the object of the obligation and the purpose of the act, and the time of the performance of the obligation, The purpose and nature of the performance are different from the two. The third chapter mainly contains the analysis and deconstruction of the basic category of the obligation of notification. This paper discusses whether the insured and the beneficiary should be classified as the subject of the obligation of notification, and draws the conclusion that "they should be analyzed concretely on the premise of whether they know the existence of the contract or not." in the section on the time of the performance of the obligation of notification, The author focuses on "how to determine the formation of insurance contract", discusses the method of establishing time, the theory of insurance law of various countries about this item and the situation of "contract renewal" and "contract change", if there is a case of "contract renewal" or "contract change", How to deal with the obligation of notification in a special way. In section III, Then, taking the historical development as the vertical axis and the insurance status of various countries as the horizontal axis, this paper analyzes the two ways of fulfilling the obligation of notification and the comparison with this item in the insurance industry of our country. In Section 4th, the author analyzes the two ways of fulfilling the obligation of notification by means of "active notification" and "inquiry and notification". In the discussion of the obligation to inform, Proposed four criteria for determining the facts, And the subjective determination of important facts. Section 5th introduces the exemption of the obligation of notification. It discusses when "facts not inquired by the insurer", "facts known to the insurer", "facts of reduced risk" occur, Why should we exempt the notifier from legal liability and our country and the United Kingdom, South Korea, Japan on this aspect of the provisions and evaluation. The last part of the paper discusses the breach of the obligation of notification. From how to judge such breach and breach of the obligation of notification through subjective and objective elements, whether the premium of insurer should be returned and how much should be returned, is discussed in the last part of the paper. The author also introduces the "indefensible" clause, which is favorable to the insured, and discusses the origin, development, application and value of the non-defensible clause in our country. In the final conclusion, the author summarizes the defects in the legislation of insurance law and puts forward some suggestions for the amendment of insurance law.
【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D922.284

【相似文献】