期刊文献+

暴雨致车辆发动机进水保险责任承担实务研究

A Practical Study on the Payment for the Car Engine Flooding Insurance under the Condition of Heavy Rain
下载PDF
导出
摘要 机动车损失保险条款通常约定由于暴雨等原因造成的损失属于保险责任范围,但同时又将发动机涉水导致的损失作为车损险的免赔事项。司法实务中,保险人是否应对因暴雨导致发动机进水产生的损失承担责任,往往成为案件的争议焦点。法院在审理发动机进水案件的时候,不能过度倾斜保护投保人,轻易认定车损险的发动机进水免责条款无效,或滥用不利解释原则,而应当在全面把握保险条款的基础上,综合投保人的投保情况以及案件发生的具体事实来做出公平公正的判决。 The insurance clauses for motor vehicle damage normally define that the car damage caused by heavy rain belongs to insurance coverage, but the engine damage caused by car wading is not included. In judicial practices, whether insurer should take the responsibility for the engine damage under the condition of heavy rain always lends to severe disputes. When hearing these cases, the court should not be heavily biased to policy holders by easily ascertaining the exceptions invalid or not abuse unfavorable explanation principles. On the contrary, the court should analyze the actual insurance situation of the policy holder and the specific fact of the case under the condition of fully comprehending insurance clauses so as to make fair judgment.
作者 石慧昉
出处 《贵州警官职业学院学报》 2017年第5期61-67,共7页 Journal of Guizhou Police Officer Vocational College
关键词 发动机进水损坏 车辆损失险 保险责任 engine damage caused by water inflow ear damage insurance: insured liability
  • 相关文献

二级参考文献13

  • 1樊启荣.保险合同“疑义利益解释”之解释——对《保险法》第30条的目的解释和限缩解释[J].法商研究,2002,19(4):84-93. 被引量:30
  • 2王静.疑义利益解释规则适用问题探讨[J].法律适用,2006(5):14-17. 被引量:4
  • 3约翰·F·道宾.保险法[M].北京:法律出版社,2001.
  • 4约翰·伯茨.现代保险法[M].陈丽洁译.郑州:河南人民出版社,1987.
  • 5傅静坤.二十世纪契约法[M].北京:法律出版社,1995:23.
  • 6Clark. The Law of Insurance Contracts [ M ]. Lloyd' s of London Press, 1997:66.
  • 7Keeton, Widiss. Insurance Law: A Guide to Funda- mental Principles Legal Doctrines and Commercial Practices [ M ]. West Publishing Co. , 1988:624.
  • 8W. David Slawson. Standard Form Contracts and Democratic Control of Lawmaking Power[ J ]. Harvard Law Re- view, 1971,84(3 ) :529 - 566.
  • 9Jeffrey W. Stempel. Stempel on Insurance Contracts [ M ]. Aspen Publishers, 2005:4 - 66.
  • 10Boeing Co. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 113 Wash. 2d 869,784 P. 2d 507.

共引文献18

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部