人身保险利益的内涵界定与制度定位——基于296份司法判决书的分析

发布时间：2018-04-30 14:51

  本文选题：人身保险利益 + 伦理　； 参考：《政治与法律》2017年06期

【摘要】：通过研究296份相关司法判决可以发现,司法实务中出现的保险金请求权是否能够转让、人身保险合同是否适用补偿原则等争议常与人身保险利益内涵的认识分歧有关。人身保险利益与财产保险利益有着较大差异,对人身保险利益内涵的认识容易受类比适用的思维进路束缚。在以社会发展的视阈认识人身保险利益的同时也应看到人身保险标的与人身保险利益为不同维度的内涵。从最初的法律规定上看,人身保险利益就表现出一种强烈的家庭关系人身依附的属性。随着团体保险的兴起以及可能存在人身保险利益样态的多元化,这种人身依附的属性得以淡化,但并非消除。人身保险利益本质为一种以伦理为基础的人身依附属性的利害关系,同时我国《保险法》第31条第2款的同意应理解为基于一定利害关系的同意。
[Abstract]:Through the study of 296 relevant judicial decisions, we can find that disputes such as whether the claim right of insurance gold can be transferred and whether the principle of compensation is applicable to personal insurance contract are often related to the different understanding of the connotation of personal insurance interests. There are great differences between the interests of personal insurance and that of property insurance, and the understanding of the connotation of interests of personal insurance is easily bound by the thinking of analogy. At the same time, it is necessary to understand the connotation of the subject matter of personal insurance and the interests of personal insurance in the different dimensions while recognizing the interests of personal insurance from the perspective of social development. From the initial legal provisions, the interests of personal insurance show a strong family relationship of personal attachment attribute. With the rise of group insurance and the diversification of life insurance benefits, the attribute of personal attachment can be desalinated, but not eliminated. The essence of life insurance interest is a kind of interest which is based on ethics, and the consent of Article 31 (2) of our country's Insurance Law should be understood as consent based on certain interest.
【作者单位】： 清华大学法学院;
【分类号】：D922.284
，

本文编号：1824992