2025年4月8日 周二
On the significant increase of the risk of online car hailing and the response of insurance law
CSTR:
Author:
Clc Number:

D922.284

  • Article
  • | |
  • Metrics
  • |
  • Reference [24]
  • |
  • Related
  • |
  • Cited by
  • | |
  • Comments
    Abstract:

    Online car hailing is a specific application of internet technology in the field of travel. The change of the purpose of the insured vehicle by the policyholder results in a significant increase in the risk degree of the insured object. There are different views on whether the insurer should bear the insurance liability in judicial practice and theoretical research. The applicant changes the purpose of the insured vehicle without authorization, which not only violates the insurance contract, but also destroys the consideration balance of the insurance contract. The obligation of noticing a significant increase in the risk level belongs to the contractual obligation, and the applicant shall notify the insurer in accordance with the provisions of the insurance contract. The contract agreement about significantly increased risk level belongs to the exemption clause, and the insurer should clearly explain the obligation, otherwise it will not have legal effect. The insurance law should introduce the principle of proportionality to adjust when facing the significantly increased risk of online car hailing. The application of proportionality principle in the insurance liability of online car hailing is the proportion compensation, which not only effectively alleviates the rigidity of the significant increase of the risk level without notice of adverse consequences, but also further corrects the consideration balance of the insurance contract to ensure the interest balance of all parties to the insurance contract.

    Reference
    [1] 梁鹏.网约车商业三者险拒赔质疑[J].保险研究,2019(2):78-87.
    [2] 武亦文,赵亚宁.网约车情境下危险增加通知义务的法律适用[J].湖北社会科学,2019(6):107-119.
    [3] 王旭升.顺风车保险拒赔案件裁判标准的审思与构建:以无讼网53份判决为基础的实证分析[J].法律适用,2019(14):77-86.
    [4] 武亦文,杨勇.保险法对价平衡原则论[J].华东政法大学学报,2018(2):146-158..
    [5] DOBBYN J F.Insurance law[M].4th ed.London:West Group,2008:4.
    [6] 马宁.保险人明确说明义务批判[J].法学研究,2015(3):102-119.
    [7] 孙宏涛.我国《保险法》中危险增加通知义务完善之研究:以我国《保险法》第52条为中心[J].政治与法律,2016(6):107-118.
    [8] 张力毅.被保险人危险增加通知义务司法适用之检讨:基于277个案例的裁判文[J].政治与法律,2019(6):114.
    [9] 林群弼.保险法论[M].台湾:三民书局,2007:238-239.
    [10] 张冠群.批判性思考下保险法立法与判决[M],台湾:元照出版社,2017:184-193.
    [11] 孙宏涛.德国保险法合同法[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2012:67.
    [12] 崔吉子,黄平.韩国保险法[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2013:263.
    [13] 刘宗荣.新保险法:保险契约法的理论与实务[M].台湾:翰芦图书出版有限公司,2011:78.
    [14] 江朝国.保险法基础理论[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2002:241.
    [15] 梁宇贤.保险法新论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2004:283.
    [16] 谢志刚,周晶.重新认识风险这个概念[J].保险研究,2013(2):101-108.
    [17] 纪海龙.比例原则在私法中的普适性及其例证[J].政法论坛,2016(5):95-103.
    [18] 郑晓剑.比例原则在现代民法体系中的地位[J].法律科学,2017(6):101-109.
    [19] 苏永钦.寻找新民法[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2012:8.
    [20] 谢鸿飞.论法律行为生效的"适法规范":公法对法律行为效力的影响及其限[J].中国社会科学,2007(6):124-142.
    [21] 姜昕.比例原则研究:一个宪政的视角[M].北京:法律出版社,2008:33-36
    [22] 张翔.基本权利的规范建构[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2008:72.
    [23] 张冠群.批判性思考下之保险法立法与判决[M].台湾:元照出版有限公司,2017:23.
    [24] 韩长印,韩永强.保险法新论[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,2010:292.
    Related
    Cited by
Get Citation

王鹏鹏.论网约车危险显著增加与保险法应对[J].重庆大学学报社会科学版,2021,27(2):188~199

Copy
Share
Article Metrics
  • Abstract:731
  • PDF: 1324
  • HTML: 1746
  • Cited by: 0
History
  • Revised:April 30,2020
  • Online: March 13,2021
Article QR Code