Study On Insured Liability Of Commercial Third Party Liability Insurance Of Motor Vehicles Around The Insurance Contract Dispute Of Mr. Zheng Sue China Pacific Property Insurance Company After The Vehicle Free Loan

The accident occurred when the borrower drive the car which was borrowed free ofcharge. The borrower shall bear the liability for compensation to victim in accordance withthe law. But the owner does not bear the liability for damage, because he has not any error inthe vehicle loan. Then, whether the insurer shall bear responsibilities of commercial thirdparty liability insurance of motor vehicles? This problem has caused controversy in practice.Some courts think the subject-matter insured of liability insurance is the insured shall bear theliability for compensation to third person. The insurer does not bear responsibilities ofcommercial third party liability insurance, if the borrower is not the insured who was recordedin the contract and the owner (the insured) does not undertake the liability for compensation.But some court held that insurer of commercial third party liability insurance underwriting thevehicle side shall bear the liability for compensation to others. So the borrower is the insuredof commercial third party liability insurance of motor vehicles. In other words, insurer shallbear responsibilities of the commercial third party liability insurance. Therefore, we have toanalyze the insurance coverage of commercial third party liability insurance of motorvehicles.In this paper, the analysis of ideas in general can be divided into four steps. The firststep writer introduced a case and concluded the focus of controversy. The second stepanalyses disputes of the case and states opinions of author on the focus of controversy. Thethird step draws a conclusion of the case based on the analysis of the above. At last authoranalyzed the problems caused by such cases and proposed schemes to solve these problems.Besides foreword and epilogue, this article is divided into six parts.The first part introduced the case and concluded the focus of controversy. The case hasthree controversial focuses. Firstly, how to determine the extent of insured liability ofcommercial third party liability insurance of motor vehicles? The second, whether Pan (theborrower) is the insured in the case? Thirdly, whether Mr. Zheng (the owner of car) isqualified person who can request the Pacific Insurance Company compensate insurancemoney?The second part, the author analyses the first controversial focus in the case. The authoranalyzes the dispute between two principles of “people oriented” and “vehicle oriented” about insured liability of commercial third party liability insurance of motor vehicle. Author thinksthat we determine the insured liability of commercial third party liability insurance of motorvehicle should follow the principle of “people oriented”. So the borrower assumed liability forcompensation in accordance with the law does not belong to the extent of insured liability ofcommercial third party liability insurance of motor vehicles.The third part analyzed the principle of insurable interest and insurance contract, todetermine whether Pan is the insured of commercial third party liability insurance of motorvehicles. Then author concluded that Mr. Zheng and his families are the insured ofcommercial third party liability insurance in the case. Despite Mr. Pan (the borrower) enjoythe insurance benefits of subject-matter insured of commercial third party liability insuranceof motor vehicles, but he is not the insured who was recorded in the insurance contract.The fourth part is the conditions of exercising insurance claims of commercial thirdparty liability insurance of motor vehicles. The author concluded that insured event ofcommercial third party liability insurance of motor vehicles did not occurred. Therefore, Mr.Zheng (the insured) is not qualified person who can request the Pacific Insurance Companycompensate insurance money.The fifth part is the author opinions on three focus of controversy of case. The author’sfinal study conclusion on the case is: the sentence of first instance is more reasonable.At last, the author proposes tow schemes to solve controversy of similar cases based onthe study of case. On one hand, follow the principle of “people oriented” and “protect thethird party” to determine the insured liability of commercial third party liability insurance ofmotor vehicle. On the other hand, promote the development of personal liability insurance.