海上保险人抗辩权研究

发布时间：2018-02-20 21:25

本文关键词： 海上保险人抗辩权抗辩事由　出处：《大连海事大学》2013年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：海上保险业的健康发展离不开法律对合同双方权利的有效制衡,虽然海商法和保险法已经对海上保险合同做出了相关规定,但许多涉及双方权利义务的规定过于笼统,无法对双方权利进行切实保障,所以在此有必要对海上保险的保险人的抗辩权的内容进行讨论,明确海上保险人抗辩权的内容和权利人行使权利的方式,从而明确双方的权利义务界限。抗辩权渊源于大陆法系,英美法系中并没有相对于抗辩权的准确概念,文章的主要写作目的在于从海上保险法中抽象出海上保险人抗辩权这一概念,结合大陆法系相关背景完善这一概念的相关理论框架。针对实践中出现原告诉状中陈述了本来应该由被告提出的抗辩这种自食恶果的做法是否应视为原告的诉的不当,而不予受理,或者被驳回的情况,本文从权利效力的角度进行分析,明确事实抗辩与权利抗辩的区分依据。对抗辩权这一主观权利进行讨论研究,区别于实践中容易混淆的抗辩事由,对海上保险人的抗辩事由分类,明确法官的审理范围,从而解决立法和司法实践中对海上保险人抗辩权这一概念模糊不清所带来的问题。本文第一部分对相关法律中抗辩,抗辩权和抗辩制度的相关概念渊源进行探讨,总结归纳相关概念的联系及区别,提出海上保险人抗辩权的涵盖范围。文章第二部分对海上保险人的抗辩权进行讨论,归纳出从程序法到实体法过渡过程中,抗辩含义的变化,区分出权利阻碍抗辩与权利阻却抗辩,并对海上保险法下的保险人的抗辩作出区分,同时结合程序意义上抗辩权使用原则与方法并展开讨论。文章第三部分海上保险法领域保险人所具有的抗辩中归纳出保险人的权利阻碍抗辩。文章第四部分展开论述了海上保险法领域保险人所具有的抗辩中归纳出保险人权利阻却抗辩。文章第五部分将《保险法》中不可抗辩条款的相关内容抽象出不可抗辩原则作为海上保险人抗辩权理论框架一部分展开讨论,值得注意的是这里不可抗辩原则与英国法下禁反言原则并不相同,但具有相通之处,在我国法律环境下体现出不同含义。本文从理论层面指导海上保险人行使抗辩权,填补我国海上保险法在抗辩权这一大陆法系概念下理论上的空白,使我国诉讼法与海上保险实体法更好衔接。
[Abstract]:The healthy development of the marine insurance industry can not be separated from the effective checks and balances of the rights of the parties to the contract. Although the maritime law and the insurance law have already made relevant provisions on the marine insurance contract, many of the provisions concerning the rights and obligations of both parties are too general. It is necessary to discuss the content of the right of defense of the insurer of marine insurance, to clarify the content of the right of defense of the insurer and the way in which the right holder exercises the right. In order to clarify the boundary of rights and obligations of both parties, the right of defense originates from the civil law system, and there is no accurate concept of the right of defense relative to the right of defense in the common law system. The main purpose of this paper is to abstract the concept of the right of defense from the marine insurance law. To perfect the relevant theoretical framework of this concept in connection with the relevant background of the civil law system. In view of the fact that the plaintiff's pleadings in practice state whether the plea which should have been put forward by the defendant should be regarded as improper in the plaintiff's action, However, in the case of inadmissibility or rejection, this paper analyzes from the point of view of the validity of the right, clarifies the basis of the distinction between the defense of fact and the defense of the right, and discusses and studies the right of defense as a subjective right. In order to solve the problem caused by the ambiguity of the concept of defense right of marine insurer in legislation and judicial practice, it is different from the confusing defense reason in practice, classifying the defense subject matter of marine insurer, and clarifying the scope of judge's trial, so as to solve the problem caused by the ambiguity of the concept of defense right of marine insurer in legislation and judicial practice. The first part of this paper discusses the related concepts of defense, defense right and defense system in relevant laws, and summarizes the relationship and difference of related concepts. The second part discusses the defense right of marine insurer, and concludes the change of defense meaning in the transition from procedural law to substantive law. Differentiating between the defense of obstruction of rights and the defence of obstruction of rights, and making a distinction between the defences of insurers under the law of marine insurance, At the same time, combining the principles and methods of using the right of defense in the sense of procedure, the article discusses. The third part of the article summarizes the defense of the insurer in the field of marine insurance law. Part 4th of the article begins with the analysis of the defense of the insurer's right of obstruction. This paper discusses the defense of the insurer in the field of marine insurance law. Part 5th abstracts the relevant contents of the non-defensible clause in the insurance law as the principle of non-defense at sea. Part of the theoretical framework of the insurer's right of defense is discussed. It is worth noting that the principle of indefensible here is not the same as the principle of estoppel under English law, but it has some similarities and embodies different meanings in the legal environment of our country. This paper instructs the marine insurer to exercise the right of defense from the theoretical level, fills in the blank in theory of the maritime insurance law of our country under the concept of the civil law system, and makes the procedural law of our country and the substantive law of marine insurance better connected.
【学位授予单位】：大连海事大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D922.294;D922.284

【参考文献】