Long time no write about your business blog, feel very ashamed! Perhaps the reason for the work, do not want to take the real case of excessive presented here, in order to avoid unnecessary disputes, creating a bad influence. A recent case always linger in my heart, lingering....... The case is that we think should be sentenced to lose the case, is superior to the. Although I am on this case verdict beg to differ, but after all the dust has settled! So it might be the case case, here! We discuss! Or for our future work ideas.

  The basic facts of the case: 2009 years, the plaintiff and the defendant signed the declaration agreed by the defendant on the freight car insurance, and the signing of commercial motor vehicle insurance policy. In the vehicle damage insurance and three party liability insurance. The insurance period is from August 14, 2010 to August 13, 2011." And the insurance are insured do not remember deductible special risks. In 2011 March, the car in the State Road 308 from north to South Road, to avoid retrograde tricycle driver, improper operation, causing the vehicle frame damage of traffic accident. The car driver report to insurance company, insurance company appointed personnel were asked to inform the driver, and inform the traffic police brigade, back to Shandong and sent the loss etc.. In March 18, 2011, the traffic police brigade of certificate issued by a road accident, finds the car driver in violation of the provisions of the first paragraph of article twenty-second "road traffic law", take full responsibility for the accident. Since then, the car was in a sheet metal factory repair, repair work material fees totalling 26900 yuan.

  The court of first instance thatThe plaintiff and defendant: signing insurance contract, legal mandatory provisions do not violate is valid contract. Both sides should fulfill the contract obligations according to the contract. The focus of this controversy is, the vehicle in no case of a collision, due to their own car damage caused by improper driving operation whether to belong to the insurance accident. From the finding of facts, the driver to avoid retrograde with the tricycle, sharp turning vehicle frame damage. The vehicle does not directly collide, no overturn. From the accident responsibility identification, the driver in the accident the improper operation of the driving led to the accident, the traffic police department has decided that a responsible driver. The vehicle driver to take emergency measures to avoid reasonable at the critical moment, prevent the occurrence of larger accident. From the behavior of the property, this behavior belongs to the emergency rescue measures. This in order to make moneyProperty rightBenefit from danger happening, have a smaller damage the legitimate rights and interests, is allowed in law. For emergency avoidance behavior caused by the loss, the insurance law of our country does not stipulate that the insurer should not assume liability to pay compensation. And the "general rules of the civil law" 129th stipulates: "the emergency caused the damage, by the person causing the occurrence of danger shall bear civil liability." In accordance with the provisions of this law, caused by the vehicle losses shall be borne by the driver take. The driver of this liability is produced in normal use in the process of vehicle insurance, then, the risk hedging brings natural shifts. So, the insurance company shall bear the liability for damage caused by the traffic accident of vehicle. The insurance clause in the way to enumerate listed cause of the insurance accident, but this list causes cannot cover all the insurance accident. On the exemption clause in the insurance company has no requirements for the improper operation of driver vehicle damage exemption or not to pay. The burden of proof according to not enough to constitute exemption or refusal reason. So, the court ruling on the vehicle damage insurance company for compensation.

   The second conclusionSecond: the facts ascertained and the same, but that the insurance accident insurance law does not belong to the accident, so that to withdraw the first instance judgment, commuted to assume no liability insurance company.   

   But I think:In this case, the two sides set up the contract of insurance, traffic accidents have no dispute. The focus of the dispute is mainly, in no case of a collision, the driver due to improper emergency avoidance operation caused damage to the vehicle, whether to belong to the insurance accident? First of all, the driver in the treatment of emergency, allowing him to think little of time, he had no way to over in one's mind. To avoid collision avoidance to reduce unnecessary casualties and losses, was the driver in dealing with similar traffic accident usually practices, more stress response is an instinctive emergency situations of drivers. This should belong to the act of necessity, general principles of civil law in the end, the vehicle losses, it should be responsible for the implementation of emergency action. As in this case, the traffic police department has identified the driver take full responsibility. But the driver is in the legal driving a motor vehicle accidents in the process, and the car in the commercial insurance. Therefore, the liability for compensation drivers should be borne by the insurance company. Secondly, if the driver does not take emergency measures to avoid the consequences, is now more than heavy. Objectively speaking, it is the avoidance of emergency measures taken to make the vehicle driver loss or insurance company to minimize the loss. Based on the principle of fairness, the insurance company should compensate. Once again, the provisions of the insurance companies, lists ways to list the causes of the accident insurance, but this list could cause insurance accident exhausted all the? Impossible. Therefore, the understanding of this clause in disagreement, the judge made a favorable to the insured explanation.Therefore, I still believe in a strong position in the insurance company today, many insurance companies the responsibility exemption or light insurance clause is one of the few overlord clause. The caseOr a judgment is to protect the interests of vulnerable groups, to judgment as well!

 One side of the story, welcome to discuss!