On Insurer's Contradiction In Traffic Compulsory Insurance Litigation

In China, there has never been the legal system paid so much controversy as Compulsory Insurance regarding the Liability in Traffic Accident of Motor Vehicles. Although the general principle of compulsory insurance exchange is "no profit no loss", some of insurance companies will be profitable, the others will be losses. There is no company to maintain almost exactly balance. After all, insurance companies are for-profit commercial organizations, rather than charity for the purpose of charitable fund. Therefore, each insurance company for their own interests will be cautious in the claims of the lug, sometimes find fault. In the contrast, the third and the insured will regarded compensation as perfectly justified without thinking of whether the fault of their own and whether the deductible compensation insurance conditions. They deem it unforgivable to refuse compensation for insurance company. Contradiction from the insurance companies comes from their resigning themselves to exist deductible. But except for a few deduction is uncontested by all legal provisions directly provided, most of the rest make both sides have to interrogate in court because existing laws, regulations and departmental rules are contradictory, or because the law can't express the conflicting legal principles applicable, or because people have different understanding of the same article without authoritative interpretation. Litigation doesn't only waste limited judicial resources, but also the third are postponed to obtain much-needed injured compensation, which makes Traffic Compulsory Insurance diminish social assistance functions. In a word, the original intention of developing Traffic Compulsory Insurance system by government can't be achieved.The reason I choose this subject is to solve who bares the responsibility in real-life Traffic Compulsory Insurance litigation by researching contradiction of insurance companies. When protecting the interests of the insurer, it helps us give the Third relief timely and effectively. The first chapter of this thesis describes the basic theories about insurer's contradiction in Traffic Compulsory Insurance litigation, including concepts, characteristics and causes about contradiction. The second chapter is specific to particular circumstance provided for exemption from the law or the laws derived, and analyze the exclusionary compensation. The third chapter discusses insurer's contradiction in Traffic Compulsory Insurance litigation from the procedural law. In another word, it explains under which circumstances insurance companies can participate in the litigation in any capacity as a qualified defendant. From the reality, the forth chapter suggests improvements to the defect in protection of laws and regulations about insurer's contradiction.