责任保险中第三者直接请求权的行使条件研究——《保险法》第条的解释与完善.docx

硕士学位论文责任保险中第三者直接请求权的行使条件研究——《保险法》第65条的解释与完善STUDY ON THE EXERCISE CONDITIONS OF THETHIRD-PARTY DIRECT CLAIMS IN LIABILITYINSURANCE: INTERPRETATION AND IMPROVEMENTON ARTICLE 65 OF THE INSURANCE LAW院 系：凯原法学院专 业：民商法学姓 名：郑丹妮指导教师：韩长印教授完成日期：2015 年11 月29 日 责任保险中第三者直接请求权的行使条件研究——《保险法》第65条的解释与完善摘 要2009 年修订的《保险法》第 65 条在保留第 1 款和第 4 款的基础上，新增了第 2 款和第 3 款；其中，第 2 款确立了我国责任保险上附条件的第三者直接请求权与特别法上规定的无条件的第三者直接请求权不同，《保险法》第 65 条第 2 款为第三者直接请求权规定了两项行使条件：“被保险人对第三者应负的赔偿责任确定”、“被保险人怠于请求”修法时，该款曾面临诸多争议；修法后，如何解释该款的分歧犹存为此，本文以第三者直接请求权的行使条件为研究对象，通过剖析和借鉴域外立法经验，结合相关基础理论，首先展开解释论的分析，而后进行立法论的探讨。

除引言和结论之外，正文共分为四章：第一章是责任保险中第三者直接请求权概述分析了第三者直接请求权的理论基础，包括其法理、性质、类型，并回顾了我国第三者直接请求权的确立过程由于现代立法已突破合同相对性原则，故法律赋予第三者直接请求权这一技术处理不存在理论性障碍对于直接请求权的性质，本文支持法定并存债务承担说及不真正连带债务说，以此作为下文分析的根基第三者直接请求权依照有无行使条件、有无抗辩权分为不同类型第二章是责任保险中第三者直接请求权行使条件的域外考察域外立法例有三：无条件的第三者直接请求权（如美国威斯康辛州、韩国）、附条件的第三者直接请求权（如美国纽约州、我国台湾地区、德国、英国）和无第三者直接请求权的一般规定（如日本）一般而言，第三者须待责任关系确定时才能向保险人请求赔偿保险金；同时，行使第三者直接请求权的情形通常为被保险人陷入破产或清算不过，对于如何认定责任关系确定，各国标准不一；德国和英国未作责任关系确定的要求此外，德国还基于强制责任保险和任意责任保险的分类，赋予第三者直接请求权不一样的行使条件 第三章是我国责任保险中第三者直接请求权行使条件的解释本文认为，第 65 条第 1 款仅为宣示性规范，明确了第三者行使直接请求权的两种可能的请求权基础，即法律规定和合同约定。

第 2 款在第 1 款所指的“法律”外延之内；其中，第 1 句规定了保险人直接赔偿第三者的法定情形，第 2 句规定了第三者直接请求权的行使条件，系第三者基于“法律”行使直接请求权的一般法上的依据对于该两个显性行使条件，均应从宽解释此外，第三者直接请求权包含三个隐性行使条件：被保险人无法请求、被保险人未支付或未足额支付赔偿金、未逾保险合同约定的责任范围第四章是我国责任保险中第三者直接请求权行使条件的完善本文认为，修法时应无须以强制责任保险和任意责任保险的分类为基础赋予第三者直接请求权不一样的行使条件建议《保险法》修订时：（1）删除《保险法》第 65 条第 1 款；（2）将“被保险人赔偿责任确定”这一行使条件改为“被保险人对第三人应负赔偿责任”；（3）将“被保险人怠于请求”这一行使条件细化，增加“被保险人无法请求”的情形，对“怠于请求”进行界定，并纳入诚信记录；（4）赋予第三者对保单信息的知悉权；（5）明确保险人对第三者的抗辩权；（6）明确直接请求权的诉讼时效关键词：责任保险，第三者直接请求权，行使条件，解释论，立法论 STUDY ON THE EXERCISE CONDITIONS OF THETHIRD-PARTY DIRECT CLAIMS IN LIABILITYINSURANCE: INTERPRETATION AND IMPROVEMENTON ARTICLE 65 OF THE INSURANCE LAWABSTRACTOn the basis of reserving Paragraphs 1 and 4, Article 65 of the InsuranceLaw revised in 2009 added Paragraphs 2 and 3, among which Paragraph 2established the conditional third-party direct claims in liability insurance inChina. Unlike the unconditional third-party direct claims provided by speciallaws, Paragraph 2 of Article 65 in Insurance Law provides two exerciseconditions for the third-party direct claims: “the insured’s liability forindemnity to the third party has been determined” and “the insured goes slowto make a request”. When amending the law, this paragraph once faced witha lot of controversy; however, after amending the law, there is stilldisagreement on how to interpret this paragraph. For this reason, this thesisstudies the exercise conditions of the third-party direct claims. By analyzingand learning from the experience of extraterritorial legislation, as well ascombining relevant basic theories, this thesis first expands analysis based onthe interpretation theory, and then discuss issues based on the legislationtheory.In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this thesis consists of fourchapters:Chapter 1 is the overview on the third-party direct claims in liabilityinsurance. This chapter analyzes the theoretical foundation of the third-partydirect claims, including its jurisprudence, nature and types, and recalls theprocess of establishing the third-party direct claims in China. Since modernlegislation has broken through the Principle of Privity of Contract, thereshould be no theoretical obstacles when the law provides the third-partydirect claims. In respect of the nature of the third-party direct claims, thisthesis supports the Statutory Coexisting Debt Assumption Theory andUntruthful Joint and Several Debt Theory, which serves as the foundation ofanalysis below. The third-party direct claims could be divided into differenttypes depending on the existence or not of exercise conditions or defenserights. Chapter 2 is the extraterritorial study on exercise conditions of thethird-party direct claims in liability insurance. There are three extraterritoriallegislative modes: unconditional third-party direct claims (such as WisconsinState in US and South Korea), conditional third-party direct claims (such asNew York State in US, Taiwan, Germany and UK) and no general provisionson the third-party direct claims (such as Japan). Generally speaking, the thirdparty could directly request the insurer to pay insurance money only when theliability relationship has been determined; meanwhile, the situation forexercising the third-party direct claims is normally that the insured falls intobankruptcy or liquidation. Nevertheless, in respect of how to identifydetermined liability relationship, the standards in different countries andregions differ; actually, Germany and UK do not require determined liabilityrelationship. Besides, Germany further distinguishes between compulsoryliability insurance and any liability insurance, pr。