本文選題：交通肇事逃逸 + 交強(qiáng)險責(zé)任　； 參考：《黑龍江大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：當(dāng)前我國已經(jīng)通過法律規(guī)定上路行駛的機(jī)動車必須投保交強(qiáng)險,并且出臺了一系列法律法規(guī)和司法解釋對于交強(qiáng)險的適用進(jìn)行了規(guī)定。但是對于投保交強(qiáng)險的機(jī)動車交通肇事后逃逸的情形交強(qiáng)險責(zé)任應(yīng)該如何界定,法學(xué)理論界和司法實(shí)務(wù)界一直存在爭議。既有人認(rèn)為此種情形下,保險公司應(yīng)該進(jìn)行賠付;也有人認(rèn)為保險公司應(yīng)該進(jìn)行墊付;還有的人認(rèn)為應(yīng)該由道路救助基金救助。之所以對于這一問題莫衷一是是因?yàn)槲覈F(xiàn)行的法律法規(guī)對于此類情況的規(guī)定較多且并不明確,甚至不同規(guī)定之間存在沖突,導(dǎo)致了適用法律時的不統(tǒng)一。法律適用的不統(tǒng)一不僅使得交強(qiáng)險不能夠?qū)κ芎θ思皶r進(jìn)行救助,也使得其社會保障功能被弱化。本文通過引用司法實(shí)務(wù)界在交強(qiáng)險理賠過程中具有代表性的實(shí)踐案例,對我國交強(qiáng)險的賠付責(zé)任和墊付責(zé)任進(jìn)行明確區(qū)分,引出了輔助交強(qiáng)險發(fā)揮作用的社會道路救助基金,并且對于機(jī)動車在投保交強(qiáng)險后發(fā)生交通事故逃離現(xiàn)場時交強(qiáng)險責(zé)任界定方面存在分歧的觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行了分析。筆者通過分析最終得出結(jié)論,雖然交強(qiáng)險具有保障交通事故中受害人合法權(quán)益的功能,但是這一社會保障功能不宜無限擴(kuò)大,否則會違背公平原則。對于此類情況,如果能夠及時確定承保交強(qiáng)險的保險人,那么由保險人按照交強(qiáng)險的規(guī)定在保險責(zé)任限額內(nèi)墊付搶救受害人的醫(yī)療費(fèi)用;如果不能夠及時確定保險人或搶救受害人的醫(yī)療費(fèi)用超出保險人按照合同約定應(yīng)該承擔(dān)的責(zé)任限額,那么社會道路救助基金應(yīng)當(dāng)先行墊付該部分費(fèi)用,而后由相關(guān)管理機(jī)構(gòu)進(jìn)行追償。交通事故在經(jīng)濟(jì)高速發(fā)展的今天是無法避免的,為逃避懲罰而在交通肇事后逃逸的情形也屢禁不止,在這種情況下,只有完善現(xiàn)有法律規(guī)定,解決交通肇事逃逸交強(qiáng)險責(zé)任承擔(dān)存在法律適用的問題,統(tǒng)一法律適用,構(gòu)建起交強(qiáng)險和道路救助基金并行的救助體系,才能夠真正地確保公共交通安全和秩序,更進(jìn)一步地維護(hù)受害人的合法權(quán)益。
[Abstract]:At present, our country has stipulated by law that motor vehicles on the road must be insured against traffic insurance, and issued a series of laws and regulations and judicial explanations for the application of traffic insurance. However, the legal theory and judicial practice have been controversial about how to define the liability of traffic insurance. Some people think that insurance companies should pay in such cases, others think insurance companies should make advances, and others think that the road rescue fund should help. The reason why there is a lack of agreement on this issue is that the current laws and regulations of our country have many and unclear provisions for this kind of situation, and even there are conflicts between different provisions, which lead to the disunity of the applicable law. The disunity of the application of the law not only makes the traffic insurance unable to help the victims in time, but also weakens its social security function. By quoting the representative practical cases of the judicial practice in the process of settlement of traffic insurance claims, this paper makes a clear distinction between the liability for compensation and the liability for advance payment of traffic insurance in our country, and leads to the social road relief fund which helps the traffic insurance to play its role. It also analyzes the different views on the definition of the liability of traffic insurance when the traffic accident occurs after the motor vehicle is insured against the traffic accident. The author comes to the conclusion through the analysis that although traffic insurance has the function of protecting the legal rights and interests of the victims in traffic accidents, this social security function should not be expanded indefinitely, otherwise, it will violate the principle of fairness. For such cases, if it can be determined in time to underwrite the insurance insurer, then the insurer in accordance with the provisions of the insurance liability limit in advance to rescue the victim of medical expenses; If it is not possible to determine in time that the medical expenses of the insurer or the rescue of the victim exceed the limits of the liability that the insurer should undertake in accordance with the contract, then the Social Road Relief Fund shall advance the expenses in advance. Then by the relevant management agencies to recover compensation. Traffic accidents are unavoidable today when the economy is developing at a high speed, and the situation of escaping after a traffic accident in order to escape punishment is not stopped. Under such circumstances, only existing laws and regulations can be improved. Only by solving the problem that the law is applicable to take responsibility for traffic accident and escape insurance, unifying the law application, and constructing a parallel rescue system of traffic insurance and road rescue fund, can we truly ensure the safety and order of public transport. To further protect the legitimate rights and interests of the victim.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：黑龍江大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：D922.284

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 劉洋;;沒有交通肇事逃逸的都市[J];人民公安;2011年10期

2 莊和美;;交通肇事逃逸現(xiàn)象引發(fā)的美德思考[J];湖南科技學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年12期

3 智慧;在外逃逸的日子很痛苦——一名交通肇事逃逸者的自述[J];農(nóng)機(jī)安全監(jiān)理;2001年05期

4 張大江;;淺析交通肇事逃逸行為[J];廣州市公安管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2002年02期

5 倪森根,劉長慧;非道路交通肇事逃逸致人死亡應(yīng)如何定性[J];檢察實(shí)踐;2003年03期

6 潘永建;“交通肇事逃逸致人死亡罪”立法芻議[J];甘肅行政學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年02期

7 周建軍;試談交通肇事逃逸致人死亡的認(rèn)定[J];安全與健康;2005年18期

8 韓永強(qiáng);交通肇事逃逸服刑四年賠償十一萬[J];道路交通管理;2005年03期

9 聶申國;;“交通肇事逃逸致人死亡罪”立法芻議[J];人大建設(shè);2005年12期

10 廖友宣;;遺棄車輛逃離與交通肇事逃逸之定性[J];安全與健康;2006年24期

相關(guān)會議論文 前3條

1 龔鵬飛;;基于成本收益視角的交通肇事逃逸預(yù)防[A];2008第四屆中國智能交通年會論文集[C];2008年

2 許凱;;左心房腫瘤猝死一例[A];中國法醫(yī)學(xué)會全國第十次法醫(yī)臨床學(xué)學(xué)術(shù)研討會論文集[C];2007年

3 柏祥婷;;試論交通肇事罪中的逃逸問題[A];當(dāng)代法學(xué)論壇（2007年第3輯）[C];2007年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 闕愛民;全省“圍剿”交通肇事逃逸者[N];河南日報(bào);2007年

2 饒澤強(qiáng)邋馮林榕 黃丹穎;福州推出交通肇事逃逸查緝預(yù)案[N];人民公安報(bào);2007年

3 記者 黃鵬飛　通訊員 廖旭峰 蒲金環(huán);收緊圍捕交通肇事逃逸者的法網(wǎng)[N];法治快報(bào);2007年

4 記者 王一寧;我省部署集中偵破肇事逃逸案件專項(xiàng)行動[N];河北經(jīng)濟(jì)日報(bào);2007年

5 河南省內(nèi)鄉(xiāng)縣人民法院 楊慧文;我丈夫是否構(gòu)成交通肇事逃逸罪？[N];人民法院報(bào);2007年

6 王國英;交通肇事逃逸與因逃逸致人死亡法律后果不同[N];內(nèi)蒙古日報(bào)(漢);2008年

7 劉英 本報(bào)記者 劉忍柱;我市交通肇事逃逸案發(fā)生率呈上升趨勢[N];撫州日報(bào);2009年

8 趙志遠(yuǎn);新鄭：落實(shí)聯(lián)動機(jī)制嚴(yán)打交通肇事逃逸[N];人民公安報(bào)·交通安全周刊;2009年

9 ;交通肇事逃逸的法律認(rèn)定[N];榆林日報(bào);2010年

10 記者 蔣予昕　通訊員 唐志平;“圍剿”交通肇事逃逸成效顯著[N];廣西日報(bào);2010年

，

本文編號：1834341