论海上保险中的近因原则

发布时间：2018-06-13 11:51

本文选题：近因原则 + 因果关系　；参考：《上海海事大学》2006年硕士论文

【摘要】：近因原则，作为海上保险法中的一项重要原则，其在保险赔付中的作用不言而喻。目前为止，国内外的学者对于近因原则的讨论一直都没有停止过。一个一句话便可以概括概念的原则，在实际的运用过程中，一直是保险人与被保险人的争议焦点，也是法官在审理保险案件时最需要慎重审查、考虑的焦点。由于我国的海商立法方面，大量借鉴了英美法系的原则和规定，因此在讨论我国海上保险法的近因原则，也同样有必要借鉴英美法的一些案例和法官的一些经典评论。在我国的海商法中，并没有关于近因原则的明文法律规定，而在英美法律中，对于近因原则也仅仅是有原则性的规定。法谚云：“只看近因，不看远因”便是对近因原则的概述。总体说来，近因原则经历了由“时间标准”到“效力标准”转变的过程，即由认为时间上最近的原因为近因至认为效力上最直接的原因为近因的过程。而在保险实践的过程中，具体运用近因原则，则有待于我们阅读大量的判例，按照运用近因的几项原则，具体情况具体分析。在保险标的发生事故造成损失后，需要判断造成保险标的损失是由单个原因还是多个原因造成；各个原因是相继出现构成一条完整不曾断开的因果关系链，还是同时出现，无法判断其发生的先后顺序；这些致损原因中是否有保单中不承保的风险，是否有保单中明确除外的原因。在仔细判断、明确了上述几点内容后，便可以根据近因原则的要求来断定，保险人是否需要对该保险标的的损失承担赔偿责任。而有关于导致损失发生的风险也是在保险近因中讨论的一个重要内容。该致损风险是怎样发生的，是否属于承保风险都是决定损失能否得到赔付的重要决定因素。这通常要求了承保风险必须是实际发生的损失，且不存在判断上的失误。在近因的适用方面，非常重要的内容就是除外责任的规定，因为近因原则的适用要收到除外条款的限制。在保单中一旦有除外责任的描述，就有可能出现近因原则不再适用的情况，而这同样需要根据具体情况分析而定的。当然，在整个保险过程中，保险人、被保险人双方各自需要或可能需要肩负的举证责任也不容忽视。本文在其中用了大量的篇幅就近因原则适用中举证责任的问题进行了各个方面的论述并给出了相应的案例作为参照。笔者认为该部分是近因中的一个重要部分，近因的使用与否、如何适用的方面，皆仰赖保险合同双方对举证的完成。对于能够完成自己举证责任的一方，在对方无其他证据对其反证的情况下，自然可以成为致损近因的合理解释方。综上，本文所从以上所提到的各个方面出发，，借助大量的保险判例对海上保
[Abstract]:As an important principle in marine insurance law, the principle of proximate cause plays a self-evident role in insurance indemnity. So far, scholars at home and abroad have not stopped discussing the principle of proximate cause. One sentence can generalize the principle of concept, in the actual application process, has been the insurer and the insurant dispute focal point, also is the judge in the trial insurance case most needs careful examination, the consideration focal point. In the aspect of maritime business legislation in our country, the principles and regulations of Anglo-American law system are used for reference, so it is also necessary to draw lessons from some cases of Anglo-American law and some classical comments of judges in discussing the principle of proximal cause of marine insurance law in our country. In the maritime law of our country, there is no explicit legal stipulation on the principle of proximate cause, but in Anglo-American law, the principle of proximate cause is only a rule of principle. As the saying goes, "look at the near cause, not the far cause" is an overview of the principle of proximate cause. In general, the principle of proximal cause has undergone the process of changing from "time standard" to "effectiveness criterion", that is, from thinking that the most immediate cause in time is the proximate cause to the most direct cause of validity. However, in the process of insurance practice, the concrete application of the principle of proximate causes, we need to read a large number of cases, according to the application of several principles of proximate causes, the specific situation specific analysis. After the loss caused by the accident of the insured subject matter, it is necessary to determine whether the loss of the insured mark is caused by a single cause or a plurality of reasons; each reason is a causality chain that has not been disconnected in succession, or it appears at the same time, It is not possible to determine the order in which they occur; whether there are risks not covered by the policy among the causes of loss, and whether there are reasons for the exclusion specified in the policy. After careful judgment, after defining the above points, we can determine whether the insurer should bear the liability for the loss of the subject matter of the insurance according to the requirement of the principle of proximate cause. The risk of causing loss is also an important part of the discussion of the recent cause of insurance. How the loss risk occurs and whether it belongs to the underwriting risk is an important determinant of whether the loss can be paid. This usually requires that underwriting risk be an actual loss and that there is no error in judgment. In the application of proximal causes, it is very important to provide for exclusions, because the application of the principle of proximal causes is subject to the limitation of exclusions. Once there is a description of exclusions in the policy, it is possible that the principle of proximate causes will no longer apply, which also needs to be analyzed according to the specific circumstances. Of course, in the whole process of insurance, the burden of proof that the insurer and the insured both need or may need to shoulder should not be ignored. In this paper, a great deal of space is devoted to the problem of burden of proof in the application of the principle of proximate cause, and the corresponding case is given as a reference. The author thinks that this part is an important part of the proximal cause. The use of the proximal cause and how to apply it all depend on the completion of proof by both parties of the insurance contract. For the party who can fulfill its burden of proof, if the other party has no other evidence against it, it can naturally become a reasonable explanation of the cause of loss. To sum up, this paper proceeds from the above mentioned aspects, with the help of a large number of insurance cases to protect marine insurance
【学位授予单位】：上海海事大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2006
【分类号】：D922.294;D922.284

【引证文献】