Research On The Application Of Article 16 Of The Insurance Law On The Insurer’s Ermination Right

Article 16 of the Insurance Law stipulates that the insurer’s right to terminate a contract is not limited by the contract,providing remedial measures and necessary guarantees for the parties involved.In the event of a statutory reason for termination,the insurer may terminate the contract without the consent of the insured party,thereby reducing contract losses.There is a significant difference between the insurer’s right of termination under Article 16 of the Insurance Law and the right of termination under other laws in the event that the policyholder violates the obligation of truthful disclosure.Although they all have attributes that affect the effectiveness of contracts,their uniqueness is reflected in the fact that on the one hand,the right to terminate belongs to the statutory right to terminate,which is different from the arbitrary right to terminate.It focuses on maintaining the balance and stability of the insurance contract relationship,and on the other hand,the application of this right may be related to insurance fraud.Therefore,there are many controversies and it is a focal point in insurance contract litigation.In judicial practice,there are many different and even conflicting views on the insurer’s application of Article 16 of the Insurance Law.The main problems focus on: First,the language of the law is unclear,and the legal concept is unclear,leading to confusion in the application of the insurer’s legal right to terminate;Second,there is a dispute over the scope of application of the insurer’s right to terminate,which needs to be clarified;Third,the legal effect of the insurer’s termination right system is unclear,which interferes with the unity of judicial decisions.In terms of research methods,various methods such as literature research,empirical research,and interest balance analysis are used to analyze and reconstruct the logic of the insurer’s right to release under Article 16 of the Insurance Law,analyzing the basic categories and the shortcomings of its structure.On the other hand,starting from the theory of insurance law and insurance practice,through the analysis of the problems and disputes existing in the exercise of the right to rescind,and combining with judicial cases and judicial interpretation,the author puts forward suggestions for improvement.Clarify the wording of Article 16 of the Insurance Law by combining judicial judgments and theoretical perspectives.Specifically,it can be divided into the following two points: firstly,the determination of "sufficient influence" in Article 16 of the Insurance Law must be based on the causal relationship theory,which can be determined by referring to three situations summarized in judicial practice.Failure to fulfill or fully fulfill the obligation to truthfully inform should not be considered as "sufficient influence" in Article 16 of the Insurance Law when there is no causal relationship between the act and the damage result;Secondly,there is no conflict between the two interpretations of "more than two years from the date of contract establishment",which are in line with the logic of legal provisions and can be applied simultaneously.In terms of the scope of application of the insurer’s statutory termination right,it is necessary to not only address the issue of whether fraud can be subject to the non defense rule,but also distinguish between intentional,gross negligence,and fraud.Firstly,fraud should be governed by the non defensible rule and follow the principle of order value priority to maintain the stability and authority of written law.Secondly,fraud belongs to direct intent and is a form of intent.Although gross negligence and intent are difficult to determine due to subjective purposes that cannot be directly identified in reality,the two situations summarized from behavioral analysis can be used as the main criteria for distinguishing.