Research On The Insurer’s Right Of Recourse In Compulsory Liability Insurance For Vehicle Traffic Accident

Nowadays, traffic accidents happen more and more frequently. Compulsory insurancefor traffic accident of motor-driven vehicle has concerned more people than ever and becomesa rather vital insurance closely related to the interest of most families.Compulsory insurance for traffic accident of motor-driven vehicle is a kind of specialobligation insurance with features of enforceability, policy and public welfare, which aredefined by legislation in most countries and regions.The history of development of compulsory insurance for traffic accident of motor-drivenvehicle system in our country is not very long. The State Council in2006issued a ruleregarding compulsory insurance for traffic accident of motor-driven vehicle which isspecifically used to adjust the system. Adhering to the legislative intent of ensuring the thirdparty timely obtain indemnification, this rule strictly restricts the exemptions of insurers. Toprevent the responsibilities of insurers from being over increased, the rule gives insurers theright of recourse to the insured under certain circumstance to transfer ultimately responsibility,which is the specific right of recourse in compulsory insurance for traffic accident ofmotor-driven vehicle.Supreme people’s court trial approves the Interpretations of Certain Issues Concerningthe Application of adjudication of the case of damage responsibility in a traffic accident in2012,which makes some modifications on some questions regarding the right of recourse ofinsurer, changes the appellation to recovery object and adjust the range of recovery reason. Ingeneral, compulsory insurance for traffic accident of motor-driven vehicle related legislationsshow tendency of continuous perfection, but there is still room for improvement in thestipulation of recovery object and recovery reason. This article starts from these two aspectsof existing problems and tries to find a way to improve the system of insurer’s right ofrecourse through analysis of legal basis of insurer’s right of recourse, specific constitution andadaptable questions.This article is divided into three parts, including introduction, main body and conclusion.For main body, it is further divided into four parts which is summarized below:The first part of main body describes the legislation of insurer’s right of recourse, andsort out the existing problems in current legislation of our country. Secondly, compared with the related legislation of Germany, Japan and Taiwan, the article summarizes their legislationexperience. Finally, making a conclusion regarding the existing problems of recovery objectof insurer and recovery reason, which includes the unsuitable appellation, less range and rigorconstitution of the insured, incomplete recovery reason and so on.The second part analyses the legal basis of insurer’s right of recourse, indicating thatinsurer’s recourse is the result of a profit game among insurer, the insured and the third party.This part first analyses the theoretical basis of protection of the interest of the third party,specifying the protection for the interest of the third party is the precondition and basis of theexistence of insurer’s right of recourse. Then, the following paragraph analyses the necessityof protection for the interest of insurer, point out that giving the right of recourse to insurer isthe inevitable requirement of protecting its interest. At last, the article analyses theaccountability of deliberately causing trouble to the insured, pointing out the necessity oftaking final responsibility.The third part analyses the specific constitution and adaptability of insurer’s right ofrecourse. This part first introduces the constitutive requirement of insurer’s right of recourse.Then it analyses the adaptability question of insurer’s right of recourse, which is the factorsneed to consider when confirming the recovery object and recovery reason, mainly includingjoin with Tort Liability Law, subjective mind of the insured, the result of the insured behavior.According to the questions raised from the first part of main body, the forth part pointsout four opinions for improvement, which are increasing the rules for the establishmentpurpose of insurer’s right of recourse, expanding moderately the range of recovery object,compensating recovery reason and revising the inconsistent places among articles.