Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

Title: 從「全有全無」到「或多或少」——以德國保險契約法上約定行為義務法制之改革為中心
Other Titles: From "all-or-nothing" to "more-or-less": Reform of Regulation on Contractual Obligations in German Insurance Contract Act
Authors: 葉啟洲
Yeh, Chi-Chou
Keywords: 全有全無原則;行為義務;因果關係;解除權;終止權;除外危險;損害防阻;特約條款
All-or-nothing Principal;Contractual Obligation;Causation;Rescind;Exclusions;Loss Prevention;Special Provision
Date: 2015-03
Issue Date: 2016-06-20 14:23:06 (UTC+8)
Abstract: 在保險關係中,保險人經常以條款約定要保人負有說明、協力\r或採取避免危險發生的特定行為義務。基於對價平衡原則與誠信原\r則,課予要保人適當的行為義務,固屬妥當。但保險條款中約定的\r義務違反效果,經常使得保險人得以免責或解除契約,進而使要保\r人或被保險人喪失全部保障,有過於嚴苛之嫌。此時除了由法院對\r保險條款公平性進行內容控制之外,主要的規制方法為在保險法上\r就約定行為義務的要件或違反效果,設立強制性的規範,以提供要\r保人及被保險人最低限度的保障。德國舊保險契約法雖禁止保險人\r解除契約,但仍以「全有全無原則」作為規範基礎,要保人或被保\r險人若非獲得全額的保險給付,就是保險人完全免責。二○○八年\r新法則揚棄了此一原則,改採酌減給付之原則,對於要保人與被保\r險人的權益保障有顯著的提升。類似的問題在我國若依「特約條款」的規定,保險人亦得解除契約而不負責任,要保人或被保險人\r之地位較德國修法前之情況更為不利,顯有改善之空間。本文擬以\r德國法的修正與其實施經驗為主要研究課題,進而從比較法的觀點\r提出我國法將來可能的修正方向。
In insurance relation, it is a commam senerio that the insurer apply special provision to impose the duty of disclosure, collaboration and loss prevention obligations on the insured. It is reasonable to impose these obligations based on the principle of equivalence and utmost good faith on the insured. Conversely, the consequence of violating the provision by losing all the coverage might be too harsh for the policyholder. In other words, the insurer would be completely exempt or has the right to rescind the contract. Apart from filing the lawsuit to claim a term void, the most proficient way is to offer the insured a minimum protection, by establishing a compulsory regulation on breaching effect and the conduct requirements in the insurance law. The old German insurance law had banned the insurer to rescind the contract, however, the old regulation still consider “all or nothing” as an essence principle; Briefly, the insured will either get the full compensation or nothing. In 2008, the new insurance law amended “all or nothing principle” and adopted the “more or less principle” for the sake of the consumer protection. Similar problems in Taiwan will be a different story, due to the “special provisions” (Taiwan insurance law article 66 to 69), if the insured violate the provision, the insurer can rescind the contract and negated the obligation. Need less to say, the Taiwanese policyholder is in a comparatively adverse condition. This essay will focuses on the German amendment law and the practical experiences to provide the overall perspective for future reference.
Relation: 法學評論, 140,223-286頁
Chengchi law review
Data Type: article
DOI 連結:
Appears in Collections:[法學評論 TSSCI] 期刊論文

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
140(223-286).pdf933KbAdobe PDF356View/Open

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

社群 sharing