交强险赔偿项目研究

发布时间：2018-05-20 08:50

本文选题：交强险 + 医疗费用赔偿限额　；参考：《西南政法大学》2016年硕士论文

【摘要】：本文通过引入案例的方式阐述了交强险限额主要存在如下问题:1.交强险的医疗费用赔偿限额下的子项目是否有赔偿顺序;如果有,顺序如何的问题;2.医疗费中的抢救费和非抢救费是否有赔偿顺序;如果有,顺序如何的问题。全文共分为六部分:分别为案例介绍、交强险限额概述、交强险限额中存在的问题、产生的原因、分析存在的问题、提出立法建议。第一部分介绍一个救助基金追偿抢救费的案例,通过建模,计算后分析有四种不同的判决结果。通过抽样统计发现,同类案件中这种可能性较为普遍。第二部分从责任保险的概念界定、国际上交强险的实行状况、我国交强险和交强险责任限额的立法规定等方面对交强险责任限额进行概述。第三部分介绍了交强险责任限额中存在的问题:1.对《条例》《条款》的法律效力位阶有分歧;2.对《条款》的法律性质有分歧;3.医疗费用赔偿限额下,子项目是否有赔偿顺序及顺序如何的问题没有立法规定;4.抢救费与非抢救费是否有赔偿顺序及顺序如何也没有立法规定。第四部分分析案件出现不同判决结果的原因是:交强险的医疗费用赔偿限额过低,子项目是否有赔偿顺序及顺序如何没有立法规定,抢救费与医药费、诊疗费、住院费概念外延不对应等。第五部分分析案例,这部分是重点。分别从《条例》和《条款》法律效力位阶的理解,《条款》法律性质的理解,医疗费用赔偿限额过低的问题,各子项目之间有没有顺序的问题四方面进行分析。重点分析了各子项目之间有没有顺序的问题,又分别从侵权法理论、实务届专家的观点、立法现状、审判实务、日常情理等方面分析:1.侵权法理论上子赔偿项目间没有顺序之分;2.实务届专家的观点也认为各子项目没有先后顺序之分;3.从现有的司法解释来看,可以从字面意思看出医疗费用赔偿限额下的医疗费优先于其他子项目;4.从审判实务来看,判决书普遍采取的做法是医疗费优先于其他子项目。通过以上分析得出医疗费应优先于其他子项目,医疗费中抢救费也应优先于非抢救费赔偿的结论。第六部分提出立法建议,建议修改《机动车交通事故责任强制保险条例》,在司法解释中规定医疗费和抢救费同时优先的赔偿规则。
[Abstract]:This paper, by introducing a case study, expounds that the main problem of traffic insurance quota is as follows: 1: 1. Whether there is a compensation order for subitems under the compensation limit for the medical expenses of traffic insurance; if so, what is the order of the problem? Whether there is a compensation order between the salvage and non-rescue expenses; if so, what the order is. The full text is divided into six parts: the case introduction, the outline of the traffic insurance quota, the problems existing in the traffic insurance quota, the causes, the analysis of the existing problems, and the legislative suggestions. The first part introduces a case of salvage fund recovery. Through modeling, four different results are analyzed. Through sampling statistics, it is found that this possibility is more common in similar cases. The second part summarizes the liability limits of traffic insurance from the definition of the concept of liability insurance, the implementation of international traffic insurance, and the legislative provisions of our country's traffic insurance and traffic insurance liability limits. The third part introduces the problem of the liability limit: 1. There are differences on the rank of legal effect of the regulations. There is disagreement over the legal nature of the articles. Under the medical expenses compensation limit, whether the sub-item has the compensation order and the order question does not have the legislation stipulation. Rescue expenses and non-rescue expenses whether there is compensation order and order is not legislated. The fourth part analyzes the reasons for the different adjudication results: the limit of compensation for medical expenses is too low, the order and order of compensation are not legislated, the cost of rescue and medicine, the cost of diagnosis and treatment, The concept extension of hospital fee is not corresponding. The fifth part analyzes the case, this part is the focal point. From the understanding of the order of legal effect of regulations and articles, the understanding of legal nature, the problem of too low limit of medical expenses compensation, and the four aspects of the order of each sub-item. Focusing on the analysis of the order between the sub-items, respectively from the tort law theory, the views of experts in practice, legislative status, trial practice, daily reason and other aspects of the analysis of 1: 1. There is no order between subcompensation items in tort law. Experts in the substantive session also believe that the sub-items are not divided into order. 3. Judging from the current judicial interpretation, it can be seen literally that medical expenses under the medical expenses compensation limit take precedence over other sub-items. Judging from the trial practice, the general practice adopted by the judgment is that medical expenses take precedence over other sub-items. Through the above analysis, it is concluded that the medical expenses should take precedence over other sub-items, and the rescue expenses in the medical expenses should also take precedence over the compensation of the non-rescue expenses. In the sixth part, it is suggested that the regulations on compulsory liability Insurance for Motor vehicle Traffic Accidents should be amended, and that the compensation rules of medical expenses and rescue expenses should be given priority in the judicial interpretation.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D922.14

【参考文献】