Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||A Study of Recognition of Pre-Existing Condition and Its Application Issues: Focusing on the Civil Judgment Bao Sian No.18 (2014) of Tainan District Court|
health insurance;retroactive insurance;waiting periods;sickness;duty of disclosure
|Issue Date:||2018-08-03 17:15:58 (UTC+8)|
|Abstract:||保險法第127 條規定：「保險契約訂立時，被保險人已在疾病或妊娠情況中者，保險人對是項疾病或分娩，不負給付保險金額之責任。」本條在疾病之認定與適用上頗有爭議。在疾病的認定上，學說似乎已經有限縮保險法第127 條之傾向，故對於疾病之認定應該審慎為之，以避免保險人不當脫免責任。對於第51 條與第127 條之關係，可認為兩者規範對象不同，各有其適用範圍。就立法論而言，可考慮進一步將追溯保險之要件明文化，以避免爭議。對健康保險而言，只要能適當掌握保險與疾病之範圍，似可考慮刪除第127 條，更能避免與其他法條之混淆與衝突。|
The Article 127 of Insurance Act provides that: “If, at the time an insurance contract is entered into, the insured is already sick or pregnant, the insurer is not obligated to pay the insured amount for the sickness or pregnancy.” However, there are controversies about the definition of sickness and the application of this article. For recognition of sickness, recent arguments intend to narrow down the scope of sickness. This paper also argues that scrutinizing of sickness is required to prevent insurers avoiding their liability. Regarding the application relation of Article 51 and Article 127, this study agrees with the argument that they have different targets and scopes. For legislative policy, it is worth of consideration to codify the elements of retroactive insurance to avoid controversies. As for health insurance, deletion of Article 127 is recommended if the scope of insurance and sickness can be properly recognized, and this should be also helpful for avoiding the ambiguity and conflict with other articles.
Providence Law Review
|Appears in Collections:||[風險管理與保險學系 ] 期刊論文|
Files in This Item:
All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.