论责任保险抗辩费用的承担与排除——以责任确定成本视角展开的《保险法》第66条分析  

On the Assumption and Exemption of Defense Costs in the Liability Insurance——A Dogmatic Analysis of Article 66 of Insurance Law of China from the Perspective of Liability Determination Costs

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,广东深圳518055

出　　处：《政治与法律》2024年第9期51-69,共19页Political Science and Law

摘　　要：因为法律术语运用带来的视角绑定效应,抗辩费用与抗辩义务的研究在我国长期被割裂。这种割裂的愈合只能求助于责任确定成本视角的引入。在责任确定成本视角之下,抗辩费用不能归为减损费用或损失勘察费用,它和抗辩义务一样,都是责任确定成本在法律层面的不同表现形式。依此对《中华人民共和国保险法》第66条进行考察,则能发现该条文存在的重大法律漏洞。依此对《中华人民共和国保险法》第66条定性,就能确定该条文的任意法性质。又因抗辩费用与抗辩义务为责任确定成本一体之两面,《中华人民共和国保险法》第66条“另有约定”的实际自由空间与保险人是否承担抗辩义务紧密关联。Due to perspective-binding effect caused by the usage of legal terminology,the research into defense costs and the duty to defend has been long separated.The end of such separation can only be achieved by resorting to the introduction of the perspective of liability determination costs.From the perspective of liability determination costs,defense costs cannot be categorized as loss-reduction costs or loss-survey costs,but a different form of liability determination costs at the legal level just as the duty to defend.If Article 66 of Insurance Law of China is examined from such perspective,major legal loopholes can be found.By determining the nature of Article 66 of Insurance Law of China on basis of this,it is able to consider it as a discretionary norm.Additionally,because the defense costs and the duty to defend are two facets of liability determine costs,the actual discretionary space of"otherwise agreed in the contract"in Article 66 of the Insurance Law of China is closely related to whether the insurer bears the duty to defend.

关 键 词：责任保险 抗辩费用 抗辩义务 格式条款 

分 类 号：DF438.4[政治法律—经济法学]