Insurance Contract Law Research Articles

재보험계약원칙(PRICL) version 1.0에 대한 약간의 검토

In 2010, the European Principle of Insurance Contracts (PEICL) stipulated that PEICL did not apply to reinsurance contracts. The reason was that the insurance contract law of most EU member states completely excluded the application of the insurance contract law to reinsurance contracts. Accordingly, the project group led by the private sector began to write the Reinsurance Contract Law Principles (PRICL). The goal of this work is to provide a unified soft law for contract law to the reinsurance market. This project has a similar purpose to the restatement promoted by the American Legal Association (ALI) and has a similar writing format. ALI's restatement is intended to enhance the clarity and simplification of the law, accommodate social needs, and encourage the performance of academic and scientific legal work useful in trials. Project Group published its achievements so far in 2019. It was named PRICL version 1.0. PRICL Project Group planned to complete the work until the end of 2023, but failed to complete it due to COVID-19 pandemic and other reasons. Korea occupies a significant portion of the global insurance(and reinsurance)market. Nevertheless, the author regret the lack of research on PRICL in Korean academia. This paper briefly introduces the basic matters of PRICL's preparation process and version 1.0. As well as the provisions to be added in the future, a detailed review of the entire article is required.

The Hybridization of the Regulatory Framework of Insurance Contract Law: Elements of a New Setting

This article aims to highlight the phenomenon of hybridization of insurance contract law, which started with its emancipation from contract law. The next phase included its internal stratification, stemming from obvious differences between commercial and consumer insurance, and various contractual positions of contracting parties in these different insurance contracts. Two features of insurance contracts regulation are addressed, based on Serbian law as it currently stands, as well as comparative legal analysis. The first feature is that the legislatively envisaged unified regime for insurance contracts is incomplete and inadequate for all manifestations of this contract. The second feature is that regulation of this matter must enable balancing of interests between insurers and insureds, especially consumers. The authors conclude that insurance regulation can only be conducive when simultaneously ensuring protection of the weaker party, protecting insurers from the negligent actions of the insured, while facilitating conduct of insurance business.

Development of Latvian Insurance Contract Law Under the Influence of European Union Law

The aim of the article is to analyse the process of application of the Insurance Contract Law in Latvia in 2018 and topropose amendments to this law to eliminate the ambiguities and shortcomings therein. This article examines thedevelopment of insurance contract law in Latvia in the light of the entry into force of the renewed law regulating thesecontractual relations, the Insurance Contract Law, in 2018. The main methods used were analysis and synthesis, scien-tific induction and deduction, comparative method and observation. Analysing the problems in the practical applicationof the renewed law, the author concludes that prima facie the renewed law needs to be clarified in certain parts andproposes solutions.

Trust and Transparency in Insurance Contract Law: European Regulation and Comparison of Laws

The aim of this paper is to examine transparency principles under English and German Law, EU acquis and PEICL and to answer the question whether current legal regulation reflects high standards of transparency requirements and offer adequate consumer protection. The author is particularly interested in investigating are there any typical, common or shared characteristics in the regulation of transparency requirements across these jurisdictions. The focus of this paper is on consumer insurance contracts only. The main argument is that through transparency we can build consumer's trust in insurance market and offer adequate consumer protection.

The insurance law in Cambodia: the economic modernization and the insurance contract law

The insurance law in Cambodia: the economic modernization and the insurance contract law

The precautionary measures clauses in indemnity insurance contract

Precautionary measures clauses impose on a policyholder or an insured person the obligation to perform certain acts or to refrain from certain activities until the occurrence of the insured event. Traditionally, the function of preventing negligent behavior by the policyholder is performed by rules on aggravation of risk or policyholder’s fault in the occurrence of the insured event. However, if they are ineffective, for example due to the inability to take into account the negligence in all cases (para 1 of Art. 963 of the RF Civil Code), the insurer is inclined to transfer some of the negligent acts onto the category of insurance exclusions in order not to pay compensation at all. As a consequence, the “all-or-nothing” principle prevails in resolving insurance disputes. The precautionary measures clauses, provided for in the Principles of European Insurance Contract Law (PEICL) and the legislation of Scandinavian countries (Sweden, Finland), makes it possible to reach a compromise: the insurer may consider the negligent behavior of the policyholder when paying compensation, but only insofar as it has affected the occurrence of the insured event or the amount of loss. This is more in line with the “proportionality rule”. In order to ensure the consumer rights, the authors propose to supplement insurance legislation (in particular, Chapter 48 of the RF Civil Code) with the legal institute of precautionary measures on the basis of the relevant rules of the PEICL.

Преддоговорная обязанность страхователя по раскрытию обстоятельств риска (“duty of disclosure”): модели в европейском страховом праве и перспективы для России

Преддоговорная обязанность страхователя по раскрытию обстоятельств риска (“duty of disclosure”): модели в европейском страховом праве и перспективы для России

Predugovorna obaveza prijave okolnosti značajnih za ocenu rizika

In this paper, the author considers issues related to the pre-contractual obligation of the insurance policyholder to report to the insurer circumstances significant for the risk assessment. The aim of this paper is to compare the provisions of the The Law on Contract and Torts (LCT), proposals for changes in Serbian law envisaged in the Preliminary Draft of the Civil Code of the Republic of Serbia with solutions from comparative law and the provisions of the Principles of European Insurance Contract Law (PEICL). The analysis showed that it is necessary to update the solutions from the LCT and that the proposed changes, in terms of special rules regarding the obligation to report circumstances relevant to risk assessment to the insurer, are largely in line with modern solutions in comparative law and PEICL. The author points out that the proposed solutions can be supplemented and improved.

Preventive Duties under Private and Public Law scilicet spei permultum sed rei paulum

The article aims at discussing preventive obligations incumbent on the insurer and other entities of the insurance relationship, in particular on the policyholder. The analysis takes into account comparative legal aspects, and therefore refers to the Principles of European Insurance Contract Law (PEICL). The author emphasizes the evolution of the provision of Article 826 of the Civil Code, which has changed his views on the scope of the preventive obligation under insurance contract. He points out the possible differences of interpretation as to the scope of the prevention as well as the issue of the insurer's reimbursement of costs due to its implementation by the policyholder. What is more, the relationship between public and private law standards has been presented, with a particular focus on Article 826 of the Civil Code. Finally, de lege ferenda conclusions have been presented.

O ograničenoj i usmerenoj slobodi ugovaranja u ugovornom pravu osiguranja - fenomen "pokoravanja" ugovora o osiguranju

O ograničenoj i usmerenoj slobodi ugovaranja u ugovornom pravu osiguranja - fenomen "pokoravanja" ugovora o osiguranju

Zaštita prava slabije ugovorne strane u skladu sa Principima evropskog ugovornog prava osiguranja

An analysis of not only domestic but also comparative legislation indicates the continued presence of the former trend in regulation of insurance contract law, which reflects the legislator's tendencies to protect the insurer from the policyholder's fraudulent conduct. However, certain legal systems have begun to amend their regulations in order to keep up with contemporary tendencies, reflected in providing the necessary protection to the weaker party, i.e. consumer. Therefore, the author analyses the mechanisms of protection of this contracting party presented in the Principles of European Contract Law on Insurance, because it is a source of soft law, whose authors sought to sublimate as many well balanced provisions as possible in order to achieve a higher level of protection for the weaker contracting party. The Paper analyses only some of the provisions of the Principles that strive to ensure the expansion in the scope of the policyholders' rights, while reducing their duties, on one hand, and excluding too severe sanctions in case of their misconduct, on the other hand. Even though it is high unlikely that any steps will be taken towards PEICL enactment by EU regulations, at least in the near future, there remains possibility for their impact at the legislative and scientific level. This is also testified by this paper, which can contribute to the review of current domestic legal solutions.

פיקאלי, פרץ ופוליקוב בבית המשפט העליון- השלכות הפרת חובותיו של המבוטח על זכאותו (וזכאותם של ניזוקיו) לתגמולי ביטוח <br>Insureds’ Breach of the Insurance Contract - The Consequences for Them and Their Victims

תקציר בעברית: לאחרונה ניתנו שלושה פסקי דין של בית המשפט העליון שעסקו בהשלכת הפרת חובות המבוטח בביטוח רכוש לרכב על זכאותו שלו ושל ניזוקיו לתגמולי ביטוח: רעא 9849/17 אבי פיקאלי נ' הכשרה חברה לביטוח בעמ, רעא 2843/18 הכשרה חברה לביטוח בעמ נ' ישראל פוליקוב ורעא 1219/18 שי פרץ נ' שלמה חברה לביטוח בעמ. על אף שכל שלושת פסקי הדין חידשו חידוש בתחום ביטוחי הרכוש לרכב ונתנו מענה לסוגיות שעד אז עמדו במחלוקת בערכאות הדיוניות – ועל אף שלפחות אחד מהם, פסד פיקאלי, יכול להוביל לשינויי עומק של ממש בשוק הביטוח – הם אינם נשענים זה על זה, ולא ברור ממבט ראשון כיצד הם משתלבים יחד לכדי מארג דוקטרינרי שלם. המטרה הראשונה של מאמר זה היא לייצר מסגרת דוקטרינרית ברורה שבה נוכל למקם את פסקי הדין האלו. המסגרת שנציע במאמר מבוססת על מועד ההפרה: המאמר יחלק את החובות בהם חב המבוטח לשלוש תקופות זמן – תקופת הזמן הטרום-חוזית; תקופת הזמן החוזית; והתקופה שלאחר קרות מקרה הביטוח – ויבחן מהן זכויות המבוטח המפר את חובותיו בתקופות אלו ומהן זכויות ניזוקיו. המטרה השניה היא לקיים דיון ביקורתי ומעמיק בפסד פיקאלי, העומד בימי פרסום המאמר לפני דיון נוסף. המאמר מזהה ארבעה מוקדי ויכוח בין שופטי המותב בפיקאלי: הראשון, לגבי מהות המוצר הביטוחי; השני, לגבי היקפו של סייג המרמה שנועד להרתיע מבוטחים מלהפר את חובותיהם בכוונת תרמית; השלישי, לגבי הצורך להתאים את המוצר הביטוחי לצרכן-המבוטח; ולבסוף, הויכוח בשאלה מהם גבולות גישת הכיסוי היחסי שעמדה בלב פסיקת בית המשפט בפסד סלוצקי, והורחבה בפסד פיקאלי גם לביטוחי רכוש לרכב (ואולי לעוד סוגים רבים של ביטוחים). המאמר יציע את עמדתו ביחס לכל אחת מהפלוגתאות האלו. החלק השלישי במאמר יסווג את חובות המבוטח בביטוח חובה לרכב – כמו גם את השלכות הפרת חובות אלו – לפי אותה מסגרת זמנים משולשת שהמאמר מציג בחלקו הראשון. English Abstract: Over the last two years, the Supreme Court of Israel had issued three major opinions regarding the implications arising from a breach of the insured party duties under an auto insurance policy: CivA 9849/17 Pikaly v. Hachshara Insurance Company LTD, CivA 2843/18 Hachshara Insurance Company LTD v. Polikov, CivA 1219/18 Peretz v. Shlomo Insurance Company LTD. Although all three decisions have provided conclusive answers to legal questions debated in lower courts for many years, these decisions were not based upon each other and it is not obvious how they all fit together. The first objective of this article is to establish a comprehensive understanding of the significance of these cases and how they form a conclusive doctrinal framework. In order to do that, we categorize the insured party’s duties into three time periods: Precontractual duties – mainly the duty not to misrepresent when obtaining the policy; Contractual duties – relevant during the policy period; and lastly – duties imposed upon the insured after the occurrence of the insured event. We then situate the three cases within these timeframes. The second objective of the article is to hold a critical discussion of the Picaly case, as it is currently standing before further hearing in the Supreme Court. The article identifies four major points of division among the three justices in the panel: first, regarding the core nature of the insurance policy; second, concerning the correct interpretation of the fraud exclusion clause in the Israeli Insurance Contract Law; the third, the need to tailor policies to consumers’ individual profiles; and fourth, the boundaries of the proportional coverage approach, introduced by the court in the 2014 Slutzky case. Lastly, we discuss the implications from our analysis of auto insurance that covers property losses (which is not mandated in Israel) to auto insurance that covers bodily injuries, which is.

Современная модель компенсационного страхования (Indemnity Insurance) и перспективы её воплощения в российском праве

Introduction: the division of insurance into indemnity insurance and insurance of fixed sums is as common in European legal doctrine as the differentiation between property and personal insurance in Russian law. The article investigates the functions and main features of indemnity insurance and modern trends in legal regulation of this type of insurance. Purpose: to demonstrate the evolution of the compensation insurance model, caused, among other things, by the penetration of the pro-consumer approach in insurance law; to assess the current state of Russian legislation on insurance contract and the proposals for its reform (formulated in Draft revision of Chapter 48 of the Civil Code) from the perspective of the indemnity insurance model. Methods: the authors apply a comparative legal research method to the legislation and doctrine of Russia, Estonia and other EU member states, model acts of insurance law (Principles of European Insurance Contract Law[1]), and also use methods of retrospective analysis. Results:the authors conclude that the indemnity insurance model is still based on long-established principles (necessity of insurance interest, good faith, etc.), although their interpretation may change over time. In addition, the strengthening of pro-consumer ideas has a significant impact on contractual relationship in indemnity insurance: the standard of requirements to the policyholder (insured person) and his liability for breach of contractual duties have been softened, while the level of requirements to the insurer as a professional subject is increasing. This is reflected in formalization of the information duty of the policyholder at the pre-contractual stage, replacement of the all-or-nothing principle by the principle of proportionality when imposing sanctions on the policyholder, including mandatory testing for the causal link between the breach of contract and materialization of risk or increase in damage. It is concluded that the Russian legislation on insurance contract requires a conceptual reform, including through the consistent introduction of the proportionality principle in all cases when sanctions are applied to the policyholder.

Some Review on the Article 42 of Japanese Insurance Contract Law

Some Review on the Article 42 of Japanese Insurance Contract Law

책임보험의 운용에 있어서 한ㆍ독 보험계약법상 차이

책임보험의 운용에 있어서 한ㆍ독 보험계약법상 차이

A Review of Non-amendment Issues Excluded from the Revision of the Insurance Law in 2014

상법 보험편 개정안이 2008년 처음 제안될 때에 모두 45개 조문에 달하였다. 그러나 정작 2014년 상법 개정안이 국회에 상정될 때에는 24개 조문으로 줄었고, 실제로 입 법 개정된 사항은 그 가운데 23개 사항에 불과하였다. 그 이유는 상법 보험편의 개정 과정에서 보험계약의 관계자인 보험자 측과 보험계약자(보험소비자) 측의 이해관계의 대립과 견해의 차이가 크게 나타났기 때문이다. 즉 2008년 1월 상법 보험편 개정안이 국회에 제출된 이후, 보험업실무계와 학계 및 시민 사회단체 등의 의견 차이가 크게 나타났으며, 사안 마다 이해관계의 대립과 충돌이 야기되었다. 입법의 과정이 어언 6년여가 흐르면서, 관계 당국은 상법 보험편의 개정 입법이 시급히 이루어져야 한다는 정책적 판단을 내리게 되었다. 이에 따라 2008년 상법 개정안의 45개 사항 가운데 대립이 적고 입법이 원활한 24개 내용들만을 추려 2014년 상법 보험편 개정안에 구성하였다. 그 결과 21개 사항이 개정안에서 제외되었다. 당초 상법 보험편 개정안에는 보험의 선의성에 기초한 건전성 확보 및 보험자의 이익에 관련된 내용들이 많았다. 그러나 2014년 상법 보험편 개정에는 주로 보험계약자(혹은 보험 소비자)의 이익에 관한 사항들이 주로 입법되었다. 그 과정에서 보험건전성이나 보험자의 이익 및 보험계약자의 의무강화에 대한 규정들은 2014년 상법 보험편의 개정안에 포함되지 못하였다. 상법 보험편 개정에 있어서, 보험계약자와 보험계약상 약자 보호라는 사회적 요구를 무시 할 수는 없다. 그러나 보험제도의 기반을 흔들 수 있는 보험의 선의성 및 보험건전성의 확보의 문제 역시 매우 중요한 사안이다. 따라서 2014년 상법 보험편의 개정안은 다소 편협하게 구성되었다는 비판을 면할 수 없을 것이다. 2014년의 상법 보험편 개정시에 제외되었던 여러 사항들에 대해 보다 심도 깊은 논의가 필요하다고 보여진다. 특히 보험의 선의성과 보험건전성 그리고 보험자의 이익 및 보험계약자의 의무의 강화에 관련된 사항들을 재검토하여 입법에 반영될 수 있도록 하여야 할 것이다.The Amendment Bill to the Commercial Act(Insurance Law) reached 45 articles when it was first presented to the National Assembly in 2008. However, when the Revision Bill of the Commercial Law in 2014 was presented to the National Assembly, it was reduced to 24 articles. In addition, the actual legislative amendments were only 23 items. The reason for this is that the insurer and the policy contractor, who are involved in the insurance contract, have been in great conflict during the revision of the Commercial Law Insurance Contract Law. Six years after the legislative process, the authorities have made a policy decision to urgently amend the Commercial Law. Among the amendments to the Commercial Act, only 24 contents with few conflicts and smooth legislation were selected. As a result, 21 items were excluded from the 2014 amendment. The 2008 Amendment Bill to the Commercial Code contained a lot of contents about the health of the insurance system and the interests of the insurer based on the goodness of the insurance. However, amendments to the Commercial Law in 2014 mainly focused on the interests of policyholders and insurance consumers. In the process, regulations on insurance soundness, insurer s interests, and insurance contractor s obligations were not included in the 2014 Commercial Law Amendment. In the amendment of the commercial law, the social demands of policyholders and the protection of the weak can not be ignored. However, the issue of insurance goodness and insurance soundness, which can shake the foundation of the insurance system, is also a very important issue. Therefore, the revision bill of the Commercial Law Insurance Act of 2014 will be criticized as being somewhat narrow-minded. In-depth discussions are needed on the issues that were excluded from the 2014 amendment of the Commercial Code. In particular, it shall review matters relating to the health of insurance system, and the enhancement of the interests of the insurer and the obligations of the policyholder. So it should be done so that it can be reflected in legislation.

상법 보험편의 개정방안에 대한 연구

상법 보험편의 개정방안에 대한 연구

독일 보험계약법상 초과보험에 관한 연구

초과보험이라 함은 물건보험에서 있어서 당사자가 임의로 정한 보험금액이 보험가액을 현저하게 초과하는 보험을 의미한다. 본 논문은 독일 보험계약법에 규정되어 있는 초과보험에 관한 내용을 다루고 있다. 독일 보험계약법 제74조 규정된 초과보험은 보험계약 체결 시 보험자나 보험계약자가 보험가액을 정확하게 산정할 수 없는 상황이 흔치 없게 발생하는 것을 예방하기 위한 방안에 해당한다. 독일 보험계약법 입법자는 제74조에 초과보험이라는 이름으로, 보험금액이 보험가액을 현저하게 초과하는 경우에 각 계약당사자는 초과보험을 배제하기 위하여 보험금액을 보험료의 비율에 맞추어 즉시 감액할 것을 요청할 수 있음을 규정하였다. 이는 독일 민법 제313조에서 규정되고 있는 행위기초의 장애에 대한 하나의 특별규정으로 인정될 수 있다. 민법 제313조가 손해보험에서 있어서 엄격한 요건을 필요로 하고 있고, 법적 효과와 관련하여 불확실하게 형성되어 있다는 점을 고려하여, 보험이라는 독특한 법률관계를 다루는 보험계약법은 민법의 일반규정이 아닌 특별규정이 요구된 것이라 하겠다. 초과보험의 적용은 손해보험에만 효력을 발생하기 때문에, 정액보험과 인보험의 경우에는 적용되지 않는다. 법적효과로는 초과보험을 배제하기 위하여 계약당사자는 보험금액에 따른 보험료를 감액할 수 있는 권한을 행사할 수 있을 뿐만 아니라(제1항), 초과보험을 통하여 보험계약자가 불법적인 재산적 이익을 위하여 보험계약을 체결한 경우라면, 보험자는 이려한 계약의 무효를 주장할 수 있다(제2항 제1문). 보험자가 그 무효가 되는 시점을 안 시점까지 보험계약자가 지급한 보험료는 보험자에게 귀속하게 된다(제2항 제2문).

Hedging the Aging Society: Challenges to the Insurance Market and Law in Singapore

The greying of society has become a significant problem in Singapore and many parts of Asia, putting great financial pressure on various aspects of the economy, including the insurance and pension markets. In this article, we generally examine certain key aspect of legal infrastructure in Singapore to see if insurance law and financial regulations in Singapore is well equipped to cope with potential problems from an aging society in the near future. In addition to conventional insurance products, we also explore other ways to hedge the so-called ‘longevity risk’ by alternative risk management products in both the wholesale and retail markets. In short, we suggest that Singapore has offered a solid framework to allow the market to develop new insurance or derivative products to address longevity risk. However, there remains some legal uncertainties to new financial products and Singapore’s insurance contract law could be more consumer-friendly to help customers to claim money in the future.

A Study on the effectiveness of introduction of insurer’s duty to provide information under the Insurance Contract Law in Germany to Korean Insurance Contract Law

A Study on the effectiveness of introduction of insurer’s duty to provide information under the Insurance Contract Law in Germany to Korean Insurance Contract Law