| dc.contributor | 風險管理與保險學系 | en_US |
| dc.creator (作者) | 葉啟洲 | zh_TW |
| dc.date (日期) | 2012 | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2-Sep-2014 09:06:56 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 2-Sep-2014 09:06:56 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 2-Sep-2014 09:06:56 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/69564 | - |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 德國與台灣的保險法制，都受到學說上所謂「全有全無原則」 （Alles-oder-Nichts-Prinzip）的明顯影響。所謂全有全無原則，係指若要保人 之行為若符合保險法之規範或保險契約之約定，則可獲得全額的保險給付（全有）； 但若其行為不符合保險法規定或保險契約之約定，則可能因此喪失全部之保險給付 請求權（全無）。此一原則具體表現在保險法關於「主觀除外危險」、「危險增加」 以及「要保人違反約定義務」的法律效果上。在全有全無原則之下，要保人縱使係 輕微地違反法定或約定義務，或縱使其義務違反並未實際上加重保險人之負擔或造 成其重大損害，要保人仍可能因此喪失全部的保險保護。此一現象是否符合誠信原 則的要求，是否對於要保人產生過重的不利益效果，在過去數十年來的德國學說與 實務上不斷地存在質疑的聲浪，尤其是在 1970 年代之後，反對全有全無原則的見 解益加強烈。為了減緩全有全無原則對於要保人的嚴苛效果，德國聯邦法院遂創設 「保險人之說明義務」以及所謂的「重要性理論」，來限制保險人主張免責或解除 契約的機會。2008 年德國新保險契約法更全面檢討所有以全有全無原則為基礎的 規定，大幅地限縮保險人完全免責的機會，依要保人可歸責程度決定保險人係一部 或全部免責，並以要保人之歸責事由與保險人之損害間的因果關係，作為控制免責 效果的工具之一，學說上稱之為「或多或少原則」（Mehr-oder-Weniger-Prinzip）。 德國保險契約法的前述發展經驗與趨勢，是否有值得我國借鑑之處？因改採或多或 少原則所產生的責任比例如何認定？在保險實務與司法實務上的可行性如何？此 等問題對於要保人之權益保護息息相關，實有研究之價值。 | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | “All-or-nothing-principle” is a guideline that influences insurance contract law both in Taiwan and German. “All or nothing” means if an insured act appropriately within insurance regulation or contract, the insured should acquire the entire cover. On the contrary, if an insured act beyond either insurance regulation or contract, it might cause the insured to forfeit the right to seek for policy coverage. This principle concretely demonstrates the objective exclusive hazard also the legitimate effects whe the insured breach the law or contract. Therefore, if the insured slightly breaches the law or contract, in addition even the infringement didn’t practically burden the insurer or causing severe impair, the insured might still lost the policy protection. This phenomenon seems to conflict the fiduciary duty, causing the insured disadvantage. “All-or-nothing-principle” had stir up plenty objections since 1970. In order to ease off the harsh effect of this principle, German federal court hence established the duty of the insurer to inform and the “relevance theory” to bind the insurer from alleging the disclaimer or terminate the contract. The German law also amended its “all-or-nothing-principle” standards in 2008, by restricting the insurers to disclaim the coverage, in other word based on the insured’s conduct to decide the responsibility, using the cause-effect to decide the final coverage. This is also known as “more-or-less-principle”. Briefly, the tendency of German insurance law from “all-or-nothing-principle” to “more-or-less-principle” has a significant impact toward Taiwan’s insurance theory. In order to protect the insured’s rights, further study needs to be completed. | en_US |
| dc.format.extent | 472996 bytes | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | - |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 行政院國家科學委員會 | en_US |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 計畫編號NSC101-2410-H004-046 | en_US |
| dc.title (題名) | 從「全有全無」到「或多或少」-德國保險契約法發展趨勢之借鑒 | zh_TW |
| dc.title.alternative (其他題名) | From "All-or- Nothing" to "More or Less" - Drawing Lessons from Insurance Contract Law in Germany | en_US |
| dc.type (資料類型) | report | en |
