当前位置:主页 > 法律论文 > 经济法论文 >

论责任保险事故诉讼时效起算的认定

发布时间:2018-01-25 19:05

  本文关键词: 责任保险 事故 诉讼时效 起算 认定 出处:《对外经济贸易大学》2015年硕士论文 论文类型:学位论文


【摘要】:《中华人民共和国保险法》(2009.2.28)第二十六条第一款规定,人寿保险以外的其他保险的被保险人或者受益人,向保险人请求赔偿或者给付保险赔款的诉讼时效期间为二年,自其知道或者应当知道保险事故发生之日起计算。依此规定,保险事故发生日成为保险诉讼时效计算的起点,作用至关重要。然而,因为责任保险事故由两部分组成:一是引发第三者索赔的基础事件的发生,二是第三者向被保险人索赔的事实发生,涉及保险人与被保险人、侵权人与被侵权人双重法律关系,故在如何界定保险事故方面,具有较大争议。本文认为,应当将引发第三者索赔的基础事件认定为保险事故,因为当引发第三者索赔的基础事件发生,第三者向被保险人索赔几乎必然性发生。如以必然发生的事件作为保险事故有违保险事故应当具有不确定性、偶然性的保险原理。在明确责任保险事故概念的前提下,本文进一步讨论我国保险法以保险事故发生之日作为责任保险诉讼时效起算点是否合理,并提出完善的建议。按我国目前保险法第二十六条的规定,被保险人一旦做出致害他人的行为,诉讼时效已起算。而此时,如受害第三方未向被保险人提出索赔,则因《保险法》第65条第3款“责任保险的被保险人给第三方造成损害,被保险人未向该第三者赔偿的,保险人不得向被保险人赔偿保险赔款。”的规定,导致被保险人难以向保险人行使索赔权。而当第三者提出索赔或被保险人向第三者履行赔偿责任后,可能已经超过保险诉讼时效,导致被保险人无法从保险人处获得赔偿。以上两种情形对被保险人非常不公平,建议将责任保险诉讼时效改为自被保险人可得权利行使时开始计算。此外,因我国保险法在特定条件下,赋予受害第三者直接向保险人索赔的权利,但未相应地为该权利设置时效限制,导致受害第三者有权利滥用的可能,本文也针对此漏洞提出了完善建议。厘清责任保险中保险事故的概念并完善保险法中对责任保险诉讼时效起算的规定,从而减少保险理赔中因对保险事故、诉讼时效起算认识存在分歧而产生的诉讼纠纷,有利于责任保险健康有序发展
[Abstract]:The first paragraph of Article 26th of the Insurance Law of the people's Republic of China provides that the insured or the beneficiary of any insurance other than life insurance. The limitation period of action for claiming compensation or giving insurance indemnity to the insurer shall be two years, which shall be calculated from the date on which the insurer knows or should know of the occurrence of the insurance accident. The day of the insurance accident becomes the starting point of the calculation of the limitation of insurance action, which plays an important role. However, the liability insurance accident is composed of two parts: one is the occurrence of the basic events that lead to the third party's claim. The second is the fact that the third party claims against the insured, involving the insurer and the insured, the infringer and the infringee dual legal relationship, so how to define the insurance accident, there is a greater controversy. The underlying event that gives rise to a third party claim should be considered as an insurance accident, since the underlying event that triggered the third party claim occurs. Third party claims against the insured almost inevitable. Such as the inevitable occurrence of events as insurance accidents against the insurance accident should have uncertainty. On the premise of defining the concept of liability insurance accident, this paper further discusses whether it is reasonable for our insurance law to take the date of insurance accident as the starting point of limitation of liability insurance action. And puts forward the perfect suggestion. According to our country present insurance law 26th stipulation, once the insurant makes the behavior which injures others, the lawsuit prescription has already counted. And at this time. If the injured third party does not file a claim against the insured, the insured does not compensate the third party because of the damage caused to the third party by the insured of the liability insurance as a result of Article 65, paragraph 3, of the Insurance Law. The insurer is not allowed to compensate the insured for insurance indemnity. "the provisions of the insurance result in the insurant's difficulty in exercising the right of claim against the insurer." and when a third party claims a claim or the insured performs the liability to a third party, it is difficult for the insured to exercise the claim. Perhaps already exceeded insurance action limitation, cause insurant cannot obtain compensation from underwriter. Above two kinds of circumstance is very unfair to insurant. It is suggested that the limitation period of liability insurance should be changed to be calculated from the time when the insurant can exercise the right. In addition, because of the insurance law of our country, under certain conditions, the injured third party should be given the right to claim compensation directly from the insurer. However, there is no corresponding limitation for the right, which leads to the possibility of abuse of the right by the injured third party. This paper also puts forward some suggestions to improve this loophole, clarify the concept of insurance accident in liability insurance and perfect the limitation of liability insurance in insurance law, so as to reduce the insurance accident in insurance claims. Litigation disputes arising from different cognition of limitation of action are beneficial to the healthy and orderly development of liability insurance.
【学位授予单位】:对外经济贸易大学
【学位级别】:硕士
【学位授予年份】:2015
【分类号】:D922.284

【共引文献】

相关期刊论文 前10条

1 孙宪超;;大陆法系民法对罗马法错误制度的继受及中国民法中的重大误解[J];安徽广播电视大学学报;2007年02期

2 刘春彦;沈燕红;;日本城市地下空间开发利用法律研究[J];地下空间与工程学报;2007年04期

3 张莉丽;辨析悬赏广告的法律性质[J];白城师范学院学报;2005年01期

4 蔡云红;试论悬赏广告[J];北京工商大学学报(社会科学版);2000年04期

5 但淑华;试论不完全履行[J];商业研究;2004年08期

6 张纯;;房与地关系法律问题探析[J];财经理论与实践;2008年04期

7 甘强,袁振华;论悬赏广告的法律性质[J];重庆工业高等专科学校学报;2003年03期

8 林恩伟;;刍议虚拟财产的法律属性[J];常熟理工学院学报;2010年07期

9 刘洋;;宣告死亡制度批判[J];研究生法学;2004年04期

10 翟寅生;陈罗兰;;共有物分管协议对抗效力刍议[J];研究生法学;2009年02期

相关博士学位论文 前10条

1 陈文华;民间规则在民事诉讼中的运用[D];山东大学;2011年

2 杨柏国;中国私募证券法律规制研究[D];华东政法大学;2011年

3 林莎;我国企业海外并购的法律风险研究[D];中南大学;2010年

4 李伟;创业投资基金组织形式法律制度研究[D];中国政法大学;2001年

5 邢颖;禁止证券欺诈法律问题研究[D];中国政法大学;2001年

6 杨汉平;政府采购法律问题研究[D];中国政法大学;2001年

7 张代恩;民事主体权利能力研究[D];中国政法大学;2001年

8 钟青;权利质权研究[D];中国社会科学院研究生院;2002年

9 张严方;消费者保护法研究[D];中国社会科学院研究生院;2002年

10 谢鸿飞;法律行为的民法构造:民法科学和立法技术的阐释[D];中国社会科学院研究生院;2002年



本文编号:1463487

资料下载
论文发表

本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/jingjifalunwen/1463487.html


Copyright(c)文论论文网All Rights Reserved | 网站地图 |

版权申明:资料由用户104d4***提供,本站仅收录摘要或目录,作者需要删除请E-mail邮箱bigeng88@qq.com