Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/128150


Title: Reassessing Accountability and Sophistication of Insured in Insurance Misrepresentation: Lessons and Implications for Taiwan
Authors: 陳俊元
Chen, Chun-Yuan
Contributors: 風管系
Keywords:  accountability; attorney; consumer protection; empirical legal study; fraud; intention; misrepresentation; negligence; sophistication; voidance of contract
Date: 2018-11
Issue Date: 2020-01-10 11:11:39 (UTC+8)
Abstract: This paper argues that the “necessity of protection” should be seriously considered when evaluating the effect of misrepresentation, but a substantial criterion or a formal standard with rebuttable and substantial exception is recommended. The weakness of insured is a key characteristic in insurance law. This feature leads to the typical idea that the insured should deserve more protection in insurance contract. However, the necessity of protection may vary in different types of insurance and occasions. Thus, many jurisdictions use consumer or business insurance, sophisticated or unsophisticated insured and similar standard to differentiate the levels of protection for insured. For misrepresentation, one of the most important issue in insurance law, many jurisdictions also use this criterion in designing misrepresentation’s elements and consequences. This paper aims to find justification for this standard theoretically and empirically for Taiwan. The paper starts with the general discussion for distinguishing consumer insurance and business insurance. Then, the focus will be moved on to misrepresentation, especially about the distinction between consumer insurance and business insurance, and its effect on misrepresentation’s elements and consequences. Afterwards, this paper argues the inefficiency of the bright-rule for evaluating the necessity of protection and the distinction between business insurance and consumer insurance. Empirical evidence is also provided to assess the effects of elements in Taiwan. Finally, the study proposes that a substantial criterion or a bright-line rule which can be rebutted by substantial evidence may be a more proper and efficient model.
Relation: Asian Journal of Law & Economics, Vol.9, No.3, pp.1-21
Data Type: article
DOI 連結: https://doi.org/10.1515/ajle-2018-0011
Appears in Collections:[風險管理與保險學系 ] 期刊論文

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
index.html0KbHTML132View/Open


All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


社群 sharing