论文部分内容阅读
案情简介2004年2月,北京知识安全工程中心购买一辆奔驰牌小轿车,并在华安财产保险公司北京分公司为该车投保车辆损失险、第三者责任险及玻璃单独破碎险。当年6月7日,奔驰牌小轿车与一农用车相撞。但保险公司以保险车辆临时号牌是伪造的、投保人故意不履行如实告知义务为由拒绝承担赔偿责任。此后,北京知识安全工程中心自行将车辆修复,支付修理费用257971元,并向北京市东城区人民法院提起诉讼。争议焦点1被告保险公司针对保险合同中的责任免除条款,是否向原告履行了明确说明的义务?法院观点保险合同中责任免除条款的规定对原告不发生效力,被告不能依据此条款的规定拒绝向原告支付保险理赔金。理由采用格式合同条款订立合同的,提供格式条款的一方应当遵循公平原则确定当事人之间的权利义务,并采取合理方式提请对方注意免除或者限制责任的条款,按照对方的要求,对该条款予以说明。该“明确说明”是指保险人除在保险单上提示投保人注意外,还应当对有关免责条款的概念、内容及法律后果等,以书面或口头形式向投保人或其代理人作出解释,以使投保人明了该条款的真实含义和法律后果。本案被告仅凭保险单上明示告知一栏中的相关提示,并不能证明被告已实际履行了“明确说明”的义务。争议焦点2被保险车辆使用伪?
Brief introduction of the case In February 2004, Beijing Knowledge Safety Engineering Center purchased a Mercedes Benz car and insured vehicle loss insurance, third party liability insurance and glass breakage insurance at Hua’an Property Insurance Company Beijing Branch. June 7 that year, Mercedes Benz cars collided with an agricultural vehicle. However, the insurance company to the temporary plate number of insurance vehicles is forged, the insured deliberately not to fulfill the obligation to inform the grounds of refusal to bear the liability. Since then, the Beijing Knowledge Security Engineering Center to repair the vehicle to pay 257971 yuan for repair costs, and to the Beijing Dongcheng District People’s Court proceedings. Dispute Focus 1 Defendant against the liability insurance clauses in the insurance contract, the plaintiff whether to fulfill the obligations clearly stated in the court view Insurance contract liability exemption provisions of the plaintiff does not take effect, the defendant can not refuse to comply with the terms of this provision The plaintiff paid insurance claims. Where a contract is concluded on the basis of the format contract, the party providing the format clause shall follow the principle of fairness to determine the rights and obligations between the parties and, in a reasonable manner, draw the other party’s attention to exemption or limitation of liability clause and explain the clause as the counterparty requests . The “clear description” refers to the insurer in addition to the policy prompts the insured notice, but also on the concept of exemption clauses, content and legal consequences, written or verbal manner to explain to the applicant or his agent, So that the insured understand the true meaning of the terms and legal consequences. The plaintiff in this case only made it clear that the relevant reminder in the column on the insurance policy does not prove that the defendant has actually fulfilled the obligation of “specifying clearly.” Disputed focus 2 insured vehicles using pseudo?