| As a unique legal rule in the field of insurance law,the reinstatement rule of insurance is of great significance in safeguarding the common interests of parties to insurance contracts and promoting the stability of transactions.The Insurance Law of the People’s Republic of China(hereinafter referred to as the “Insurance Law”)in1995 specifically stipulated the effectiveness of the insurance contract suspension and reinstatement system for personal insurance contracts,and the “Insurance Law”(2009 Amendment)also made certain changes to the reinstatement system.In order to adapt to the rapid development of the insurance industry and better resolve the relevant disputes concerning the application of the rules of reutilization,the “The Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Insurance Law of the People’s Republic of China(III)”(hereinafter referred to as “Judicial Interpretation III”)further improved the rules for the reinsurance of personal insurance contracts.This article is divided into three parts,the main contents of each part are as follows:The first chapter of this article outlines the basic connotation and applicable dispute points of the reinsurance rules of insurance contracts.First of all,through sorting out related judicial review of insurance contract reinstatement,we summarize the main problems involved in the specific application of this rule and see that thedifferent courts’ determinations on the nature of the reinsurance insurance contract,the applicable condition of the reinstatement and whether the insurant should fulfill the duty of disclosure.Secondly,starting from the basic concept of the reinsurance rules of insurance contracts,the author discusses the value orientation of the reinstatement rule: for the policy holder,the reinstatement rule provides relief measures for maintaining the validity of the contract and reduce the time and cost.For the insurer,it can reduce operating costs and stabilize insurance business volume.Then,this article introduces the legal nature and legislative model of the reinstatement of insurance contracts.The author holds that the insurance contract after reinstatement is a special contract with the combination of the old contract and the new contract.This article focuses on the analysis of the characteristics and deficiencies of China’s current legislative model for reinstatement.The second chapter discusses the controversy over the specific application conditions of China’s insurance contract reinstatement rules and points out the current transition of China’s legislative model which is from “negotiating” to “compulsory”,focusing on the insurer proposed in Article of “Judicial Interpretation III”.The in-depth analysis of consent limits is mainly conducted in terms of the identification of “significant increase in the risk level” and the determination of “suspended period”.In terms of objective judgment criteria,the specific circumstances of the increase in risk should be strictly distinguished and the insurer should be given a certain degree of choice.In terms of subjective judgment standards,the “reasonable insurer”standard should be adopted,constructed from the insurer’s industry practice and the overall environment when reinstating;and in the determination of the “suspended period”,the insurer should be given the right to negotiate to solve the problem of time limitation under the existing judicial interpretation.The third chapter begins with the specific issues such as the setting of the insured person’s obligation of truthful disclosure and the application of incontestable clauses under the rule of reinstatement.First,we introduced the arguments on the policy holder’s obligation of disclosure when the insurance contract revives.Although the current law in our country does not make explicit provisions on this issue,in practice,the situation when the insurance company requires reinstatement policy holder to fulfill the obligation of truthful disclosure is not uncommon.However,fully recognizing or denying the policy holder’s obligation to inform is too absolute to be accepted,and it should be observed that the setting of the policy holder’s obligation to inform under the reinstatement rule has a certain value.Under such circumstances,the policy holder’s obligation to inform also must be defined and grasped more strictly and meticulously,both in terms of nature and scope.After discussing the main content of the obligation to truthfully inform under the rule of reinstatement,the author also used this as a premise to answer the question of judging the starting points of the ineffective defense period and the suicide exemption clause during the period of the reinstatement. |
