免责情形下交强险赔偿的法律适用

发布时间：2018-05-12 10:22

本文选题：交强险 + 免责　；参考：《吉林大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：交强险免责条款是指由于出现法律法规规定或保险合同约定的情形,保险公司对在此情形下原本属于交强险赔偿范围内的受害人损失免予赔偿或附条件进行赔偿的规定。交强险的商业性、射幸性以及防范道德风险的需要,决定了交强险免责条款产生。由于我国交强险免责条款零散规定在不同法律规范中,且规范不够明确具体,导致我国对交强险免责情形、赔偿范围等方面认识不统一,并最终导致“同案不同判”的法律乱象。2012年1 2月21日开始实施的《最高人民法院关于审理道路交通事故损害赔偿案件适用法律若干问题的解释》对交强险免责条款作出了新的规定,在一定程度上解决了“同案不同判”的法律问题,但交强险免责条款在某些方面仍存在着一定问题:现行法律规范对于免责条款规定不统一,会导致不同的机构以及事故中的各方当事人对免责条款不同理解,使免责条款在适用的过程中仍会出现混乱的局面;我国设置免责条款所追求目的是促进道路交通安全,但在其行使过程中对保险公司赔偿所规定的相关限制,会直接损害交通事故受害人获得赔偿的能力,违背了交强险对当事人进行保护的首要立法目的,导致立法目的冲突,同时免责条款所引发对受害人保护程度的不同,也违背法律基本原则——公平原则;在免责情形下,保险公司根据法律规定承担原本不应承担的赔偿责任的同时,法律也赋予了保险公司在承担责任后,对侵权人享有进行追偿的权利。但因该项追偿权法律规范的缺失以及保险公司出于诉讼成本的考虑,导致保险公司往往怠于行使追偿权,这一方面造成保险公司的实际损失,另一方面使实际侵权人逃脱了相应的制裁,未能受到应有惩罚,不利于社会公平正义的实现。本文在研究分析相关国家和地区交强险及免责条款之后,通过具体案例分析得出结论,在关于交强险免责条款的相关规定冲突时,因司法解释在司法实践中的效力优势以及所具有的其他优势,应当优先适用《最高人民法院关于审理道路交通事故损害赔偿案件适用法律若干问题的解释》,并建议应当对《机动车交通事故责任强制保险条例》关于免责条款的规定予以修改,使有关免责条款的法律规定相一致,并达到相互衔接、统一的状态,为法院审理免责情形下交通事故时统一裁判尺度提供法律依据;在免责条款引发交强险立法目的冲突时,我们应当始终坚持对受害人的保护为首要立法目的。在免责情形下,保险公司应当第一顺位承担受害人的人身损害赔偿责任,无论实际侵权人是否先期进行了赔偿。通过减少免责情形下保险公司赔偿的限制,来避免立法目的冲突的发生,同时实现交强险对受害人的平等保护;通过完善相关立法和改变追偿方式的手段,来保障保险公司追偿权的行使;随着影响交强险相关因素不断改善,逐步剔除交强险中免责条款的规定。
[Abstract]:The exemption clause of strong insurance refers to the stipulations of the insurance company to compensate for the loss of the victim, or the conditions attached to the conditions stipulated in the law or regulation or the insurance contract, for the loss of damages or the conditions attached to the victim within the scope of the compensation in this case. Due to the fragmentary provision of the exemption clause in China's strong insurance policy in different legal norms, and the specification is not clear and specific, it causes our country to disagree on the circumstances of disclaimer and the scope of compensation, and eventually leads to the legal disorder of "the different judgments of the same case" in the "Supreme People's court" which began to be implemented in December 21st.2012. Some questions about the application of law on the cases of compensation for road traffic accident damages are explained, and new regulations have been made to the exemption clause of strong insurance. To a certain extent, the legal problems of the "different cases of the same case" are solved, but there are still some problems in some aspects of the exemptions clauses of the high risk insurance. Disunity will lead to different understandings of disclaimer clauses in different organizations and parties in the accident, and there will still be confusion in the process of application of disclaimer; the purpose of setting exemption clauses in our country is to promote road traffic safety, but the relevant restrictions on the compensation of insurance companies in the course of its exercise will be limited. The ability to directly damage the compensation for the victims of a traffic accident violates the primary legislative purpose of the protection of the parties to the parties, which leads to the conflict of the legislative purpose. At the same time, the protection degree of the victims caused by the exemption clauses is different, and the basic principle of the law is contrary to the basic principle of the law. In the case of disclaimer, the insurance company is according to the law rules. The law also endows the insurance company with the right of recourse to the infringer when it is liable for compensation, but the loss of the legal norm of the right of recourse and the consideration of the cost of the insurance company often cause the insurance company to exercise the right of recourse, in this respect, the insurance company is insured. The actual loss of the company, on the other hand, makes the actual infringer escape the corresponding sanctions and is not punished and is not conducive to the realization of social fairness and justice. In a sudden, the judicial interpretation of the effectiveness and other advantages of the judicial practice should be given priority to the interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the application of laws on the trial of compensation cases for road traffic accidents, and it is suggested that the regulations on compulsory insurance for vehicle traffic accidents should be stipulated in the provisions of the exemption clause. It will be amended to make the legal provisions of the disclaimer provisions consistent, and to achieve a state of cohesion and unity, and provide the legal basis for the court to unify the judgment of the traffic accident in the case of disclaimer. When the exemption clause triggers the conflict of the legislative purpose, we should always adhere to the protection of the victims as the primary legislative purpose. In the case of disclaimer, the insurance company should bear the liability of the victim's personal injury in the first place, regardless of whether the actual infringer has made the compensation in advance. By reducing the limitation of the indemnity of the insurance company under the circumstances of reducing the exemption, to avoid the occurrence of the conflict of the legislative purpose, and to realize the equal protection of the strong risk to the victim; and through the perfect phase. The legislation and the means of changing the way of recourse will be used to guarantee the exercise of the right of recourse of the insurance company; with the continuous improvement of the related factors affecting the strong insurance, the provisions of the exemption clauses in the insurance are gradually eliminated.

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D922.284

【参考文献】