Motor vehicle traffic accident liability compulsory insurance and road passenger transport carrier's liability insurance comparison and analysis

 One, the problem about the legal nature of the motor vehicle third party liability insurance

    Motor vehicle third party liability insurance into the commercial third party liability insurance for motor vehicles and motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance. The former is referred to as the "commercial three party risks" or "commercial three liability insurance", which is also known as "motor vehicle traffic accident liability compulsory insurance", referred to as "pay strong risk" or "compulsory three party insurance".

   (a) the law of commercial motor vehicle third party liability insurance:

    According to the State Council "motor vehicle traffic accident liability compulsory insurance regulations" forty-fifth article: "the owner of the vehicle management, since the implementation of these regulations within 3 months from the date of the insured motor vehicle traffic accident liability compulsory insurance; insurance expired insurance commercial motor vehicle third party liability insurance, before the implementation of this regulation, shall be compulsory transportation insurance accident liability insurance for motor vehicles." Article forty-sixth: "in these Regulations shall enter into force as of July 1, 2006." Accordingly, can be identified before July 1, 2006 third insured motor vehicle liability insurance for the commercial third party liability insurance for motor vehicles, non motor vehicle traffic accident liability compulsory insurance.

    Questions about the nature of motor vehicle third party liability insurance, the Supreme People's court in July 26, 2006 had "(people) Ming Chuan [2006]6, Ming Chuan telegram forwarded to the Zhejiang Provincial Higher People's court for compulsory third party liability insurance nature of the reply," the letter explicitly before July 1, 2006 property insurance third party liability insurance for business insurance".

   (two) the law of motor vehicle traffic accident liability compulsory insurance:

   "Insurance law" Eleventh paragraph second: "in addition to the provisions of laws, administrative rules and regulations to insurance, insurance companies and other entities shall not force others to enter into any contract of insurance."

   "Road traffic safety law" the seventeenth stipulation: "the compulsory third party liability insurance system, and set up social rescue fund for road traffic accidents. The specific measures shall be formulated by the state council."

    July 1, 2006 implementation of the "motor vehicle traffic accident liability compulsory insurance regulations" that "the establishment of road traffic safety law" and the "motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance" formally to run.

Two, about the insurance liability of legal nature of road passenger transportation

    Whether the insurance liability compulsory insurance of passenger road belong to? Whether there is relationship between commercial insurance and compulsory insurance? The author tries to discuss from the following aspects:

   (a) the insurance liability compulsory insurance of road passenger transportation.

    The so-called "compulsory insurance", "insurance law" Eleventh article second shall be legal norms, namely "law, administrative regulations to insurance" to "compulsory insurance", in addition to the "voluntary insurance", the compulsory insurance and voluntary insurance corresponding.

    The State Council "road transport regulations" implemented in July 1, 2004 thirty-sixth stipulates: "operators of transportation of dangerous goods transport operators, shall be respectively for the passengers or dangerous goods against the carrier's liability insurance." As the national administrative law "the road transport regulations" expressly operating passenger car must be insured carrier liability insurance, therefore, the road passenger transport carrier's liability insurance compulsory insurance, It goes without saying that.
In this case the court of first instance that "passenger carrier's liability insurance, compulsory insurance without legal basis" and the law conflict. Insurance as a statutory insurance has the same mandatory road passenger transport carrier's liability insurance of motor vehicle traffic accident liability compulsory insurance, the two are.

   (two) the insurance liability passenger road for commercial insurance.

    Compulsory insurance and commercial insurance is not a contradiction. As a "cross strong insurance compulsory insurance compulsory insurance regulations" clearly defined, the biggest difference between it and the carrier's liability insurance is that if the two party to profit for the purpose of. Cross strong insurance operation follow the "break even" principle, has the public welfare; and the carrier's liability insurance temporarily does not have the above characteristics. The public welfare of compulsory insurance and the commercial three party insurance to distinguish. In the absence of express provisions of national law, the carrier's liability insurance is still profitable, the carrier's liability insurance as commercial insurance, no doubt.

    As mentioned above, the compulsory insurance and voluntary insurance should be relative, commercial insurance is compulsory insurance, voluntary insurance can also be, but the real and commercial insurance is corresponding to the social insurance (social insurance is not the "insurance law" normative category, but to in the establishment of "social insurance law" category, this does not repeat).

Three, the Supreme Court of law (Min Yi) Ming Chuan misunderstanding existing insurance [2006]6

    When it comes to compulsory insurance and commercial insurance is not a contradiction argument, I have to mention the Supreme People's court people a bright pass [2006]6 document, the document is misled most legal persons will "compulsory insurance" and "commercial insurance" as opposed to each other, and so do the classification of insurance: compulsory insurance and commercial insurance.

    Ming Chuan telegram and reply: "according to the provisions of" Regulations of the people's Republic of China Road Traffic Safety Law "in article seventeenth, the nature of the third party liability insurance as commercial insurance. Traffic accident damages disputes occurred, should be in accordance with the provisions of the insurance contract, determine the liability insurance company to assume." To further clarify the nature of insurance "in July 1, 2006 before the third party liability insurance as commercial insurance".
  
    A division of the supreme residents apparently misunderstood difference voluntary insurance and commercial insurance, a sign of the two. As I previously discussed, "compulsory insurance" and "voluntary insurance" should be relative, "commercial insurance" and "social insurance" of the corresponding. Compulsory insurance is a commercial insurance, social insurance is compulsory insurance. Commercial insurance is voluntary insurance, also can be the compulsory insurance. The Supreme People's Court on the motor vehicle third party liability insurance is a commercial insurance to distinguish the commercial third party liability insurance for motor vehicles and motor vehicle traffic accident liability compulsory insurance, is not science. The Supreme Court of law (Min Yi) Ming Chuan [2006]6, misled the most legal workers and lead to such a conclusion: compulsory insurance and commercial insurance should be relative, cross strong insurance compulsory insurance, third party liability insurance as commercial insurance, commercial insurance is not a compulsory insurance. This thesis is just insurance liability of road passenger transportation has overturned. Road passenger transport carrier's liability insurance is compulsory insurance, compulsory insurance and commercial insurance.

    Four, motor vehicle traffic accident liability compulsory insurance and road passenger transport carrier's liability insurance comparison and analysis

   (a) the same point

    1, the two are the legal insurance, compulsory insurance: the former provided a legal basis for the "road traffic safety law", "cross strong insurance regulations", which provided a legal basis for the "road transport regulations";

    2, the two are the liability insurance, "insurance law" by the fiftieth regulation, the civil liability of the insured to undertake to others as the subject matter of the insurance;

    3, the two are a sub set the limits of liability: the former is divided into medical expenses limit, death and disability compensation for property damage compensation limit and three sub limit of liability, the latter is divided into medical compensation, disability compensation limit death and property damage compensation amount of three sub limit of liability;

    4, the two part of the exemption clause, such as driving without a license, drunk driving, the insured intentionally etc.;

    5, the two will be the insured losses as the exclusion;

    6, the two party insurance period is one year.

    (two) different point

    1, security object security is different: the former outside the car insurer, victims of the staff, the staff car passenger, including the car driver;

    2, the scope of compensation is different: because the cause of traffic accident arbitration or litigation expenses and other related expenses, the former unconditional no compensation, other legal expenses and the latter for arbitration or litigation costs and the written consent of the insurer;

    3, different compensation project: the Supreme Court judicial interpretation of personal injury compensation for all projects ("cross strong insurance clause" provisions of 20) were included in the compensation project scope, the latter of mental injury solatium to exemption;

    4, different terms: the former only drunk drunk as a disclaimer, the latter will exemption clause extension for drinking, smoking or injecting drugs, anesthesia drugs were driving;

    5, the exemption clause is different: the latter clause more widely, such as earthquake, tsunami, the government behavior, the insured negligence and so on, see the "road passenger transport carrier liability insurance clause";

    6, the deductible clause is different: the former is not set deductible clause, while the latter is provided with a franchise agreement;

    7, formulate the main different: the former provisions formulated by the PICC uniform application, the latter by the insurance companies to make report to CIRC for record;

    8, the limits of liability is different: unified the former limitation of liability, and according to each accident all the victims as the maximum compensation limit, the limit of liability is divided into each of the limits of liability and the cumulative limit of liability, shall be determined by the insured, and according to the different rural, urban class line limit of liability is different,;

    9, the sub limit compensation project is slightly different: the former will follow-up treatment costs placed in compensation for medical expenses, while the latter on the death compensation for disability allowance under.

    10, specification according to different: the former has a special "motor vehicle traffic accident liability compulsory insurance regulations" shall be unified and standardized, and the latter has no unified law;

    11, responsibility according to different: the former is the insured civil tort compensation liability to the third party, the latter is the carrier of passenger transport contract responsibility for passengers.