No driver's license personnel to drive a motor vehicle traffic accidents insurance company may reject

The case

　　

Did not show any signs, on the morning of March 29, 2012, Shenzhen branch manager of a company Li Xiaodong, as usual, came to company work, not for a while, received a phone call manager, asked him to Ping on a single business. The driver beam on time to light truck drove in front of the office building, car is not stalled, Li Xiaodong opened the driver's door, sit on the driver.

From the city on the way to the Shenzhen Shantou highway, Li Xiaodong was opened smoothly, beside the still small voice guidance beam, is no accident. The car a lot still road downtown, Li Xiaodong stopped two times, he was wrong to steering wheel back to the small beam, if not dynamic driving mind, may not have what thing. However, the place, he is to the driver gave him out of the way. Thus, light truck in his hands faster. The Shenzhen Shantou highway from west to East Road, the road is narrow, a Chery car neither fast nor slow running in the front, Li Xiaodong felt always follow behind, heart not great, Ming several loud speakers, but people are not over. This, Li Xiaodong not listen to discourage car drivers, to the non motor vehicle lanes on a crutch, think through the reverse driving way, forcible overtaking.

Just then, tragedy happened in an instant. In the Shenzhen Shantou Highway No. 188 Road, Li Xiaodong also did not understand how the matter, he watched his pickup truck, crashed into a car traveling in the same direction of the bicycle, the rider fell to the ground, was run over the wheel.

The driver trabecular yank the hand brake, but it was too late. Li Xiaodong's driving without a license, middle-aged mechanic Fang Hua to ride to work in a chemical plant, on the spot to be knocked down, rolled.

Three party liability for claims against

"Morning people go out or how good, less than an hour, came the news saying 'no'." Fang's wife and two children grief. You know, go to work in the factory of the old party but home "pillar". Mrs. Fang said, "he is not in good health, in recent years has been at home for illness, now two children, one just to work, another is still at school." No savings for they do not know the back of the day how to live.

But, they found the lawyer, the compensation of traffic accident 582982.07 yuan requirements, including lost wages, transportation costs, funeral expenses, death compensation, was dependent for living expenses and mental injury solatium etc..

According to the scene traffic police then survey found, Li Xiaodong driving a motor vehicle in the non motor vehicle lanes, and did not have a driver's license, should bear full responsibility for the traffic accident, and face life driving ban. Extremely upset Li Xiaodong, understand oneself to a family caused great disaster, he said he was willing to bear the responsibility.

But Li Xiaodong and his company also think, the vehicle is belong to the insured vehicle, Is it right? Shall be borne by the insurance company of the compensation fees?

They found that home insurance, answer the car accident, the driver for the non motor vehicle driver's license, then signed "the relevant clause of insurance contract" agreed "driving without a valid certificate, or loss of third of the insurance of vehicles, passengers, drivers of economic compensation are irresponsible" therefore, refuse payment.

Because the China Insurance Company, our family has not been damages, the lawyers will belong to Li Xiaodong, car companies and insurance companies all three party, the court.

Trial

Jointly and severally liable first insurance company

Insurance companies in the defense in the refusal reasons "and the insured vehicle is' absolutely franchise 'agreed in the settlement terms, and Li Xiaodong driving a vehicle's situation belongs to the absolute deductible." But the court held that, although the insurance companies have "absolute deductible" agreement, but in our country, "insurance law" and the "road traffic safety law", and no similar provisions, the law does not give the insurance company in this case can be "absolutely franchise".

The court of first instance verdict "Li Xiaodong driving without a license and the reverse direction, should bear all the civil responsibility. Vehicles belonging to any company vehicle management responsibility, deal with the accident bear compensation responsibility to advance. The insurance company to assume the third party liability insurance compensation. The total payment Fang Hua home 467222.38 yuan traffic accident compensation."

The insurance company appeal

The insurance company verdict of the first trial, appeal called "between China and Li Xiaodong this is a case of people between the cases of traffic accident damages, but the insurance company and the fangs no legal relationship, the court of first instance to two different legal relationship processing in a lawsuit, but not the trial agreement the contract of insurance, contrary to the basic principles of civil litigation, the insurance company should not be listed as the defendants in the case."

Insurance companies also pointed out that, in the case of traffic accident occurs, the state of the motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance has not yet to formulate the corresponding measures, the court of first instance verdict should not direct insurance company jointly and severally liable to the payment of compensation. But the insurance contract between the insurance company and vehicle company, compulsory insurance contract is not the "road traffic safety law" in this case, the driver driving without a license, has formed the exception responsibility stipulated in the insurance contract, the insurance company should not assume liability to pay compensation. Request the court of second instance undo a judgment.

Court of appeal upheld the decision

The second instance court after that, China's "insurance law" provisions, the insurance on the insured to third party damage, in accordance with the law or the agreement in the contract, directly to the third party compensation insurance. Visible, "insurance law" gives the direct request right to insurance company regarding the liability insurance. China's "road traffic safety law" is the direct request right is granted, within the limits of insurance liability, insurance of victims have direct payment obligations, in case of litigation, insurance company is the direct defendant.

Lawyer commented

The insurance company should compensate the victim

The lawyer thinks, this case is the implementation of the "road traffic safety law", appear related norms and measures have not yet introduced during the case. Cases involving the litigation status of the insurance company, the third party liability insurance property insurance company, scope of compensation liability and compensation basis, where the key issue is the determination of the third party liability insurance property.

"Before the implementation of the road traffic safety law", the people's court to deal with traffic accident compensation in the case of the legal basis is "general principles of civil law", "approach to road traffic accidents" standard. At this stage, the third party liability insurance "three liability insurance" is defined as commercial insurance, the insurance company is not listed as compensation in the case of the defendant, not directly to take the responsibility to compensate the victim. Between the insurance company and the insured of insurance contract dispute as a separate deal, the two sides agreed in the contract clauses, respected fully as the scope of liability basis.

May 1, 2004 started the implementation of the "road traffic safety law", brought the compulsory third party liability insurance "insurance" which is a new type of insurance, but with the support of the "motor vehicle traffic accident liability compulsory insurance regulations" has not issued, which makes the "cross strong insurance" system cannot be started, "cross strong insurance" relationship, and other existing insurance mutual interface and other issues are also no clear specification. During this period, the people's court in the trial of cases of compensation for traffic accident, began to explore different approaches. From look on the whole, there will be "three party liability insurance" as "pay strong risk", or as part of the tendency of "cross strong insurance", the court to hear the case, often be the insurance company listed as one of the defendants, negating some agreed in the insurance contract, the judgment required insurance companies according to the relevant according to the provisions in the "road traffic safety law", assume liability to pay compensation to the victim.

This case is a case appeared in this period.

Therefore, the court of second instance that, after May 1, 2004, to the national unity of the motor vehicle third party liability compulsory insurance system, road traffic accidents, the vehicle has been insured motor vehicle third party liability insurance, the insurance company shall be liable in accordance with the law on the "road traffic safety law" in, is the third party liability insurance obligations. Therefore, the insurance company claims that the case for Li Xiaodong driving without a license to cause accidents, has constituted the insurance contract except responsibility, it does not assume any liability of the appeal, the court shall not support. The court of appeal upheld the decision.

Before the implementation of the "road traffic safety law", the people's court in this case the referee to victim one party interests are more fully protected, while in the insurance company party, at rates not adjusted, the liability for compensation significantly aggravated. It should be said, this is the people's court in the case, weigh the advantages and disadvantages to make the most appropriate treatment.

"The implementation of motor vehicle traffic accident liability compulsory insurance regulations", "cross strong insurance" system has been implemented. That same month, the Supreme People's Court issued "the 2006 people He Zi No. first letter", the "three liability insurance as commercial insurance", and "pay strong risk" to draw a line. This should be regarded as the people's Court of "an important turning point in your understanding of the three liability insurance", "road traffic safety law" should be applied only to "pay strong risk" and the "three party liability insurance" does not apply. "The three liability insurance, the insurance company shall only" to the insurance contract as the basis of liability, which means a return to "the situation before the implementation of the law on road traffic safety".

"Road traffic safety law" idea in advance, the related regulations and measures of relative lag, is the main reason appears with many twists and turns in judicial practice. Also should see, although some differences still remain unclear, but on the whole, along with the trial practice of continuous exploration and summary, the relevant laws and regulations increasingly perfect, the people's court awareness and judgment on such cases has been gradually moving towards a unified scale. The parties are a pseudonym [Department] of a blog post excerpt