Research On The Recourse Right In Compulsory Liability Insurance For Vehicle Traffic Accident

The traffic safety problem caused by the motor vehicle has been the focus of the society in a long time. Compulsory liability insurance for motor vehicles in China has played an important role in the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the victims, and to reduce the social pressure caused by motor vehicle traffic accidents. Compulsory liability insurance for motor vehicles aims to protect the interests of the victims. However, the provision regarding the insurer’s right of recourse makes protection of the interests of victims at risk.The Article 22 of the Regulation on Compulsory Traffic Accident Liability Insurance for Motor Vehicles(hereinafter referred to as the Regulation) is about the insurer’s right of recourse. This provision makes the compensation scope for the victims in a controversial state because of the vague expression. Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Cases on Compensation for Damage in Road Traffic Accidents(hereinafter referred to as the Interpretation) was issued by the Supreme People’s Court in November 2012. The Article 18 of the Interpretation gives a new description about the insurer’s right of recourse, which is similar with the Article 22 of the Regulation. Certainly there are several differences, such as the situation of recovery and the scope of application. This judicial interpretation was oppugned by some people after issued.This paper tries to point the defects about the the Article 22 of the Regulation and affirms that the Interpretation has revised the insurer’s right of recourse by comparing the two provisions regarding the insurer’s right of recourse. Meantime, we also realize that the design abou the insurer’s right of recourse still has room for improvement. The paper hopes to provide some theoretical support and improvement suggestions about the insurer’s recourse. This paper is divided into five parts:The first part introduces the significance, background and research methods of this paper;The second part demonstrates the rationality of the insurer’s recourse by discussing legislative goal of compulsory liability insurance for motor vehicles. This part summarizes the elements of exercising the right of recourse by comparing the two similar but different provisions.The third part introduces the specific cases and analyses the judicial application about the aforesaid provisions. Then we can contrast the differences about the legislative value between the two provisions.The fourth part expounds right attribute of the insurer’s recourse and confirm the insurer’s recourse as insurance subrogation by analyzing related theories. This part draws the relevant legal provisions of Germany, Japan and Chinese Taiwan and find the shortage of the Article 18 of the Interpretation. This part also introduces the specific application of insurance subrogation system for compulsory liability insurance for motor vehicles, and hope that the the insurer’s recourse system would further perfect.The last part is the conclusion. The scope of compensation and the reason of recourse is more explicit in the Article 18 of the Interpretation compared with the Article 22 of the Regulation. The Article 18 of the Interpretation is worthy of recognition whether it is from the legislative purpose or legislative technique. However, the deficiency is that this Article would not indicate right attribute of insurer’s recourse and need to be further corrected in the future.