责任保险人抗辩义务的引入路径  

Introduction Path of Liability Insurer’s Duty to Defend

作　　者：吴奕锋 Wu Yifeng

机构地区：[1]北京大学深圳研究生院国际法学院

出　　处：《法学》2022年第7期117-130,共14页Law Science

摘　　要：在我国的责任保险中,保险人的抗辩义务长期缺位,这在实践中引发了诸多难题。这些难题的妥当解决有赖于责任保险人抗辩义务在我国法上的引入。就其引入而言,大部分学者所主张的强行法立法方案,构成对保险人主给付范围的强行扩张,在现实层面会引发保险市场风险,在理论层面则完全排除了无抗辩义务责任保险产品的未来发展空间,不应当被采纳。在现阶段,责任保险人抗辩义务的引入应当选取“任意性规范+提示说明义务”的任意法模式:在立法定义中以有抗辩义务的责任保险作为该类有名合同的典型形态,但保留作出偏离立法规定之约定的可能。如果作出偏离立法规定之约定,则保险人需要承担特别的提示说明义务。其目标在于消灭信息不对称对投保人决策自由的影响,最终以市场竞争而非法律强制的逻辑解决我国责任保险中存在的问题。It has given rise to quite a lot of practical difficulties that the absence of the duty to defend of Chinese liability insurers,the solution of which depends on the introduction of this duty in Chinese Law.As far as the introduction path is concerned,the legislative scheme of a mandatory rule is advocated by most scholars,which should not be adopted,since its essence is to forcibly expand the scope of the insurers’ main performance.It not only artificially creates massive risks at the economic level,but also completely eliminates the future development space of liability insurance products without the duty to defend.In the current Chinese insurance law system,the only path that can achieve the goal of introducing the duty to defend is the “default rule + reminding and explanation obligations”:on one hand,legislation should stipulate the duty to defend,but it can only be used as a default rule and can be excluded by standard terms;on the other hand,when the insurer excludes the duty,he must perform a special reminding and explanation duty.The purpose of this path is to eliminate the influence of information asymmetry on the decisionmaking freedom of the insured,and finally solve the existing problems of liability insurance in China with the logic of market competition rather than legal compulsion.

关 键 词：责任保险 抗辩义务 强行性规范 任意性规范 提示说明义务 

分 类 号：D922.284[政治法律—经济法学]