Research And Analysis On The Legal Exemption Of Life Insurance Insurers

Along with the social development,people pay more and more attention to their own rights and interests safeguard,especially their health and life,and for their own health and life safeguard way is the best choice and the insurance company life insurance contract to transfer and disperse risks brought about by the economic burden.Insurance contract design is reasonable or not,is not only decided for people with enthusiasm,more about the management benefit of the development of life insurance and the insurance company,so the insurer legal disclaimer is important how to set up.Because the parties to a contract relates not only to the life insurance contract,policy-holder,insurant,also involved the insurant,the third beneficiary,social public welfare,such as multiple interests,so the set of legal disclaimer should not only consider the contract when the interests balance problem of the world,must balance the rights and interests of stakeholders.Only in this way can we play the role of the legal interest regulator to settle disputes and highlight the fairness and justice represented by the law.This article will focus on the insurance law 43,44,45,with the help of the outside experience,the careful analysis of its reasonable and inadequacies,and give its own suggestion."Insurance law" article 43 compared with the "insurance law" article 65 02 has its reasonable progress,mainly displays in the law explicitly stipulated in the case of the damage caused by the beneficiary deliberately,only the loss of beneficiary beneficiary,the insurer cannot therefore be exempted from its own insurance responsibility.But the point remains.Mainly: 1.The applicant and the beneficiary's identity question: when the applicant is the beneficiary at the same time,how should the law be applied,and whether there is any contradiction between article 43,1 and 2?2.When the policy-holder is not the beneficiary,the policy-holder intentionally damages the insured,and whether the legislation gives the insurer the right todischarge the liability? Is such a provision fair to innocent beneficiaries? 3.Policy-holder,beneficiary beneficiary intentionally subjective intention of the damage caused by the decision problem,namely the current insurance law did not make clear a regulation only in policy-holder,beneficiary defrauds insurance money under the condition of intentional killing,harm insurant,insurance personnel have to waive the responsibility of the payment of the insurance benefits is reasonable.The main doctrine of the first two questions is entirely disclaimer,partial disclaimer and unspeakable.The author will give his own opinion on how to improve and why the article 43 should be improved."Insurance law" article 44 after 09 new order provisions during the period of 2years of exemption,do not have person of civil action competence to end his life,the insurer may not refuse the beneficiary pay insurance gold to request or other stakeholders.This is a progress,but some scholars have raised doubts that limiting the ability of the person to act can also be excluded from the liability of the insurer because of the suicide of the insured.The main reason is that it does not have the will ability and the subjective intention of suicide,and in this case,the moral hazard of the insured "to pay the money" is almost non-existent.In addition,during the period of liability set is an effective measure to balance the interests of all parties,but just answer effect after recalculated during the period of liability provisions should there not be recognized in academia,think it is a sign of moral risk prevention excessive,and does not conform to the legal nature of the contract.In this article,we will discuss these issues in detail,especially the reasons why people with limited capacity must be excluded from the insurer's exemption."Insurance law" 45 regulation,insurant intentional crime or because of resisting criminal coercive measure executes to make oneself disable,dead,the underwriter enjoys all disclaimer according to law.Is the dispute mainly manifested in the fact that intentional crime is insurable? Both the Anglo-American law system and Japan's latest insurance law have undergone a transformation from the negative to the positive,which is worth our reference.If intentional crime is insurable,how can we judge which of these guarantees and which should not? Aimed at the problem of Taiwan scholar Mr JiangGuochao "proximate cause principle" gives a good explanation,the British justice Lord Shaw is what is proximate cause also gave his opinion,it is worth our using for reference.Finally,should the concept of "intentional crime" be consistent with the criminal law? There are two main theories for this problem: 1.Theconcept of "intentional crime" is not equivalent to criminal law.2.It must be said that in order to maintain the same concept,it needs to be exactly the same as the criminal law.The author will give his own opinions and opinions on the above questions in the main body,and give his own conclusions on the perfection of 45.Hundreds of feet tall buildings without solid foundation construction,so the author in this paper will detail what is insured liability before the above questions,what is the insurance people related theory basis of some cases should be exempted from liability.Law is formulated to regulate and balance the interests of all parties,the interests of all parties involved and especially life insurance contract is numerous,so as the risk prevention and control of 43,44,45,must take into account the interests of all parties to the interests of the various trade-offs must be justified,reasonable properly.If law regulation is unreasonable,uneven,lead to the interests of all parties will have a lot of harm,the author will be introduced in the text,and in the legislative,judicial,how to do it effectively regulate disputes,try to balance the interests of all parties,give their own opinions and comments.This article innovation mainly displays in,in this paper,the underwriter of birthday danger contract liability insurance law in 2002 compared to the terms of the progress after reasonable place and the new order still exist deficiencies to give a comprehensive and detailed discussion,and the relevant issues on the basis of the experience in other country belongs to the author's point of view is given.At the same time,there are some viewpoints that the author also put forward new evidence to support.