本文關鍵詞： 保險人 說明義務 理論 實務　出處：《華東政法大學》2012年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】：保險人的說明義務自1995年我國《保險法》誕生之日起，便是學界一直研究的課題。至今已經(jīng)過去17年，但是這個問題依然還在討論中。實務中的主要問題是說明義務缺乏可操作性的評判標準，導致保險業(yè)務中的大量糾紛，重創(chuàng)了保險業(yè)在廣大人民群眾心目中的應有的形象。有鑒于此，筆者通過大量資料的整理研究，試圖提出一些現(xiàn)行說明義務的完善意見。 本碩士論文由三個部分組成。 第一部分：介紹保險人說明義務的定義、特征、國內外此項法律制度的歷史沿革，以及與投保人告知義務的異同之處。 第二部分：闡述了保險人說明義務的法理基礎。首先，說明義務的法律基礎源于民法的霸王條款即最大誠實信用原則。其次，由于保險合同的格式條款在保險業(yè)的廣泛運用，合同法中的格式條款理論為說明義務提供了依據(jù)。最后，保險相對民眾的知識水平，具有天生的專業(yè)性、復雜性，故經(jīng)濟學中的信息不對稱理論也在法學學科中為保險人說明義務提供了理論支持。 第三部分：此部分是本文的重點內容。分別從六個方面審視了實踐中的問題及提出完善建議。 第一方面：說明義務的履行主體。對保險人及其員工、保險代理人、保險經(jīng)紀人提出不同的履行說明義務的要求。 第二方面：說明義務履行的時間和對象。時間上，說明義務履行的是先合同義務。對象上，保險人說明的對象應為投保人或其代理人，而非被保險人。 第三方面：說明義務的范圍。將保險合同條款分為四類，分類提出了履行說明義務的不同標準，，并總結了實務中說明義務的八大問題，提出自己的淺顯意見。 第四方面：說明義務的履行標準。對形式標準與實質標準進行了一一闡述。本文支持實質標準中的“修正的一般標準”作為說明義務的履行標準。 第五方面：說明義務的履行方式。“說明”與“明確說明”在操作中很難做明確區(qū)分。應推行不同條款不同說明標準的分層機制即：“免除保險人責任條款”執(zhí)行“保險人提示規(guī)則+保險人主動說明規(guī)則”；“一般保險條款的說明義務”執(zhí)行“保險人提示規(guī)則+投保人主動詢問說明規(guī)則”。 第六方面：違反說明義務的法律后果。其法律后果有不發(fā)生效力和解除合同兩種觀點。我國采用不發(fā)生效力說，筆者認為需依照具體案情而定，不能一概而論。
[Abstract]:Since the birth of the Insurance Law in 1995, the insurer's obligation of explanation has been the subject of academic research. However, this issue is still under discussion. The main problem in practice is the lack of operational criteria for the evaluation of obligations, which leads to a large number of disputes in insurance business. In view of this, the author tries to put forward some suggestions on the perfection of the present explanation obligation through the collation and study of a large number of materials. This thesis consists of three parts. The first part introduces the definition and characteristics of the insurer's obligation to explain, the historical evolution of the legal system at home and abroad, and the similarities and differences between the insurer and the policyholder. The second part expounds the legal basis of the insurer's obligation of explanation. Firstly, the legal basis of the obligation of explanation originates from the principle of maximum good faith in civil law. Secondly, due to the widespread application of the form clause of insurance contract in the insurance industry, The theory of format clause in contract law provides the basis for explaining the obligation. Finally, the level of knowledge of insurance in relation to the public is inherently professional and complex. Therefore, the theory of information asymmetry in economics also provides theoretical support for the insurer's obligation of explanation in the subject of law. The third part: this part is the main content of this paper. It examines the problems in practice from six aspects and puts forward some suggestions. The first aspect: the main body of performance of the obligation. The insurer and its employees, insurance agents, insurance agents, insurance brokers put forward different requirements for the performance of the obligation. The second aspect: explain the time and object of performing the obligation. In time, it is the prior contract obligation to show the obligation to perform. On the object, the object of the insurer's explanation should be the policyholder or its agent, but not the insured. The third aspect: expounding the scope of obligation. The article of insurance contract is divided into four categories, which puts forward the different standards of fulfilling the obligation of explanation, summarizes the eight problems of explaining obligation in practice, and puts forward its own simple opinions. Aspect 4th: the standard of performance of the obligation of explanation. The formal standard and the standard of substance are expounded one by one. This paper supports the "modified general standard" in the substantive standard as the standard of performance of the obligation of explanation. Aspect 5th: the manner in which the obligation is to be fulfilled. It is difficult to make a clear distinction between the "description" and the "clear description" in operation. A hierarchical mechanism with different specifications and standards should be implemented, namely, "exemption from insurer liability clause" "the insurer prompts the rule the insurer takes the initiative to explain the rule"; "the general insurance clause's explanation duty" carries out "the insurer prompts the rule the policy-holder to inquire the explanation rule". 6th aspects: the legal consequences of breach of the obligation of explanation. There are two views on the legal consequences of the breach of the obligation of explanation: no effect and rescission of the contract. In our country, the theory of no effect is adopted, the author thinks that it should be decided according to the specific circumstances of the case, and can not be generalized.
【學位授予單位】：華東政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D922.284

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 于海純;;保險人說明義務程度標準研究[J];保險研究;2008年01期

2 梁鵬;;新《保險法》下說明義務之履行[J];保險研究;2009年07期

3 李傲,夏軍;試論我國行政補償制度[J];法學評論;1997年01期

4 焦富民;論誠實信用原則與我國現(xiàn)代合同法的重塑[J];河北法學;2002年04期

5 方樂華;我國“銀行保險”發(fā)展的法律思考[J];河南大學學報(社會科學版);2005年05期

6 千聞;保險人的醒意義務[J];江蘇保險;1996年Z1期

7 沈暉;;論保險代理人行為對保險人之拘束力[J];江蘇經(jīng)貿(mào)職業(yè)技術學院學報;2011年02期

8 曹興權;反差與調適:保險人說明義務的履行——兼論《保險法》第17、18條的修改[J];求索;2005年02期

9 王恩韶;《保險法》:一部具有中國特色和國際水準的法律——《保險法》起草小組副組長王恩韶教授訪談錄[J];上海保險;1995年10期

10 方樂華;論保險合同的成立及其效力——關于保險合同法修改的法律思考[J];上海保險;2005年05期

相關碩士學位論文 前2條

1 石建光;保險人的說明義務[D];華東政法大學;2010年

2 李寒光;保險人說明義務的法律研究[D];西南財經(jīng)大學;2010年

本文編號：1498514