保险合同复效的法律问题研究

发布时间：2018-05-20 23:40

本文选题：复效 + 同意权　；参考：《武汉大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：在长期的保险合同履行过程中,投保人难免因一时的疏忽大意或经济困难而不能按时交纳保费。对于该迟延给付,若按合同的一般履行规则,保险人可解除合同,但是如此对投保人而言,因一时之差错而丧失保险之保障太过严苛。虽然投保人也可以选择申请新保单,但往往会因被保险人的年龄增加或健康状况恶化等原因而面临更不利的投保条件甚至被拒保之境况。因此,设置中止和复效制度,给予陷于一时之困境的投保人补救合同效力之机会,避免因合同解除给其生活或长期投资造成更大的损失。我国《保险法》以及《最高人民法院关于适用中华人民共和国保险法若干问题的解释(三)》(以下简称《解释三》)都对此进行了规定并历经多次修改,但仍存在许多可争议之处。本文首先通过分析保险合同复效相关案例,提出司法实务中存在的问题:不同的法院对复效保险合同的性质、复效时投保人是否应履行告知义务、保险人的复效同意权是否应予以限制、保险人是否应履行催告义务、观察期条款的性质及观察期的起算点等问题的认识存在分歧,导致类似的案件判决结果却相差甚远。其次,介绍了保险合同复效的必要性:复效对投保方而言,保险费率更低、保单的现金价值积累更快、并且可以享有更多特权和优惠;对保险人而言,可以减少经营费用、累积更多有效保单、更有利于业务开展。然而,由于保险合同具有天然的信息不对称性,所以在复效过程中存在逆选择和道德风险,这也是各种复效相关问题之源。第三,介绍保险合同复效的法律性质和立法模式:复效的法律性质理论上有原合同说、新合同说以及特殊合同说,本文支持复效保险合同为容"原合同条款和新告知内容"为一体的特殊合同;复效的立法模式有同意模式、可保模式、自动复效模式、宽松可保模式,通过对比分析四种模式的优劣,本文认为宽松的可保模式是立法之趋势。第四,探讨了我国保险合同复效存在的具体疑难问题:保险合同复效申请的主体、时间,补交保费的范围,可保证明的规范以及对保险人同意权的限制;复效时投保人是否应再次履行告知义务,复效后不可抗辩期间、自杀免责期间如何起算;如何规范保险人催告义务以及实务中存在的观察期条款。文末对我国保险合同复效制度提出了具体的完善建议。
[Abstract]:In the long-term insurance contract performance process, policy-holder due to negligence or financial difficulties and can not pay the premium on time. For the delay, the insurer may terminate the contract in accordance with the general performance rules of the contract, but it is too harsh for the policyholder to lose the insurance protection due to a temporary error. Although the policyholder can also choose to apply for a new policy, but often because of the insurant's age increase or the health condition deterioration and so on, the insured will face more disadvantageous insurance conditions and even the situation of being refused the insurance. Therefore, the system of suspension and reinstatement should be set up to give the policyholder in a short time the opportunity to remedy the validity of the contract, and to avoid the greater loss to his life or long-term investment caused by the termination of the contract. China's Insurance Law and the Supreme people's Court's interpretation of several issues concerning the application of the Insurance Law of the people's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as "interpretation three") have all made provisions and been amended many times, but there are still many controversial points. First of all, through the analysis of the relevant cases, this paper points out the problems existing in the judicial practice: the nature of the reinsurance contract in different courts, whether the policyholder should perform the obligation of informing when the insurance contract is resumed. Whether the insurer's right of consent should be restricted, whether the insurer should fulfill the obligation of notice, whether the nature of the observation term and the starting point of the observation period are different, leads to the difference of the judgment result of similar cases. Secondly, it introduces the necessity of the reefficacy of insurance contract: for the insured, the premium rate is lower, the cash value of the policy accumulates faster, and the insurance policy can enjoy more privileges and preferences; for the insurer, the operating expenses can be reduced. Accumulation of more effective policies, more conducive to business development. However, due to the nature of information asymmetry in insurance contracts, there are adverse selection and moral hazard in the process of reefficacy, which is also the source of various problems related to reefficacy. Thirdly, it introduces the legal nature and legislative model of the revalidity of insurance contract: the legal nature of revalidity has the theory of original contract, the theory of new contract and the theory of special contract. This paper supports the special contract of "the original contract clause and the new information content". The legislative model of the duplicate effect includes the agreement mode, the insurable mode, the automatic duplicate mode, the loose insurable mode, and so on. Through comparative analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the four models, this paper thinks that the loose insurable model is the trend of legislation. Fourthly, it discusses the specific problems existing in the reefficacy of insurance contract in China: the main body, time, the scope of premium, the norm of guarantee and the restriction of the insurer's right of consent; Whether the policyholder should perform the obligation of informing again, how to calculate the period of suicide exemption, how to regulate the insurer's obligation to call notice and how to regulate the observation period clause in practice. At the end of this paper, the author puts forward some concrete suggestions for the improvement of the system of double effect of insurance contract in our country.
【学位授予单位】：武汉大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D922.284

【参考文献】