再保险中原被保险人的直接请求权研究

发布时间：2018-05-05 03:31

本文选题：再保险合同 + 原被保险人　；参考：《上海交通大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：传统再保险理论普遍认为,再保险合同独立于原保险合同,一般情形下,基于债的相对性理论,原被保险人不能直接向再保险人提出赔偿或给付保险金的请求。但基于合同自由原则,当事人的意思表示可改变各方当事人的法律地位,原被保险人可以基于合同的明确约定取得对再保险人的直接请求权,司法实践中还出现了再保险合同与共同保险合同的“杂交合同”,我国《保险法》第29条第2款的现行规定已不能满足现代保险业的发展对法律规范的需求。本文结合我国再保险市场的发展特点和原被保险人直接请求权的法理基础两个方面论证了认可有关原被保险人直接请求权约定效力的必要性和合理性,并提出对《保险法》第29条第2款的修改意见。在我国保险市场中,中小保险企业亏损严重,在保险公司并购或破产中发生的保险业务转让情形中,原保险公司与受让方保险公司就承继原保单持有人的保险责任所达成的协议属于广义上的再保险合同,原保单持有人即为原被保险人,此时法律默认了原被保险人的直接请求权。另一方面,我国再保险业高度依赖境外保险公司,当境内原保险人资不抵债、破产或拒绝偿付时,若否定原被保险人的直接请求权,原被保险人的利益将无法得到保护。因此,有必要确认当事人之间有关原被保险人直接请求权约定的法律效力。从再保险合同的性质分析,再保险合同不同于责任保险合同,不适用法律对责任保险中有关法定第三人直接请求权的规定。我国《保险法》第29条第2款不是效力性强制规范,若当事人在原保险合同及再保险合同中明确约定了原被保险人的直接请求权,该约定应该有效。原被保险人可依“债权让与”、“第三人利益合同”或“债务加入”三种解释路径取得对再保险人的直接请求权。因此,基于当事人之间的约定,发生约定之情形时,原被保险人可向再保险人直接请求赔偿或保险金给付,但以再保险合同中约定的再保险人的责任为限。笔者建议修改我国《保险法》第29条第2款,添加“但原保险合同或再保险合同约定的除外”的但书规定,将当事人明确约定原被保险人直接请求权之情形排除在原条款适用范围之外。
[Abstract]:The traditional reinsurance theory generally holds that the reinsurance contract is independent of the original insurance contract. In general, based on the relativity theory of debt, the original insured can not directly make a claim to the reinsurer for compensation or payment of insurance funds. However, based on the principle of freedom of contract, the expression of the will of the parties may change the legal status of the parties concerned, and the original insured may obtain the right of direct claim against the reinsurer on the basis of the explicit agreement of the contract. In judicial practice, there is a "hybrid contract" between reinsurance contract and co-insurance contract. The current provisions of Article 29 (2) of our country's Insurance Law can no longer meet the needs of the development of modern insurance industry for legal norms. Combined with the development characteristics of the reinsurance market in China and the legal basis of the original insured's right of direct claim, this paper demonstrates the necessity and rationality of approving the contractual effect of the original insured's right of direct claim. The article 29, paragraph 2, of the Insurance Law is amended. In our country's insurance market, small and medium-sized insurance enterprises have serious losses, and in the case of insurance business transfers that occur during mergers and acquisitions or bankruptcy of insurance companies, The agreement reached between the original insurance company and the transferee insurance company on the insurance liability of the original policy holder is a broad reinsurance contract, and the original policy holder is the original insured, The law acquiesces to the direct claim of the original insured. On the other hand, China's reinsurance industry is highly dependent on overseas insurance companies. When the domestic original insurer is insolvent, bankrupt or refuses to pay off, if the original insured's right of direct claim is denied, the interests of the original insured will not be protected. Therefore, it is necessary to confirm the legal effect of the agreement on the original insurant's right of direct claim between the parties. From the nature of the reinsurance contract, the reinsurance contract is different from the liability insurance contract, and the law does not apply to the direct claim of the legal third party in the liability insurance. The second paragraph of Article 29 of our country's Insurance Law is not the compulsory norm of validity. If the parties in the original insurance contract and the reinsurance contract explicitly stipulated the direct claim of the original insured, the agreement should be valid. The original insured can obtain the right of direct claim against the reinsurer according to the three interpretation paths of "assignment of creditor's rights", "contract of benefit of the third party" or "join of debt". Therefore, based on the agreement between the parties, when the agreement occurs, the original insured may directly claim compensation or insurance compensation from the reinsurer, provided that the liability of the reinsurer as stipulated in the reinsurance contract is limited. The author suggests amending the second paragraph of Article 29 of the Insurance Law of our country to add the proviso of "except as agreed in the original insurance contract or reinsurance contract". The parties expressly agree that the original insured's right of direct claim is excluded from the scope of application of the original clause.
【学位授予单位】：上海交通大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D922.284

【相似文献】