论责任保险中受害人直接请求权的构建

On the Construction of the Victim’s Direct Claim Right in Liability Insurance

责任保险中如何协调被保险人和受害人的利益,一直以来都是实践中的难题。为了更好地保护受害人的利益,理论界许多学者主张赋予受害人直接请求权,但是该请求权的构建又受限于传统民法理论。通过对规范和裁判的梳理,可以发现我国一直区分强制责任保险和自愿责任保险进行请求权构造,在强制责任保险中肯定受害人的直接请求权,而在自愿责任保险中则相对较为模糊。责任保险中受害人直接请求权的学说主要有三种,分别是利第三人合同说、并存债务承担说和法律特别规定说。前两种学说在解释上并不具有正当性,法律特别规定说也只能解释强制责任保险。受害人救济权利的构造应当区分强制责任保险和自愿责任保险,前者的受害人享有实体上的直接请求权,后者的受害人仅享有程序上的特别代位权。

How to balance the interests of the insured and the victim in liability insurance has always been a difficult problem in practice.In order to better protect the interests of the victim,many scholars in the theoretical circle advocate giving the victims the right of direct claim.However,the construction of this right of direct claim is constrained by the traditional civil law theory.A reviewe of the norms and cases reveals find that there has always been a distinction between compulsory liability insurance and voluntary liability insurance in China.In compulsory liability insurance,the victim's direct claim right is affirmed,while in voluntary liability insurance,it is relatively vague.In liability insurance,there are three main doctrines of the victim's direct claim right,namely,the third party contract theory,the coexisting debt assumption theory and the law special stipulation theory.The first two theories are not justified in interpretation,and the special provisions of the law can only explain compulsory liability insurance.The structure of the victim's relief rights should be distinguished between compulsory liability insurance and voluntary liability insurance.The victim of the former enjoys direct substantive claims,while the victim of the latter only enjoys special procedural rights of subrogation.