诉责险典型争点及裁判立场解析
Analysis of Typical Disputes and Judgment Positions of Litigation Liability Insurance
DOI: 10.12677/DS.2023.96367, PDF,   
作者: 何家颐:华东政法大学国际金融法律学院,上海
关键词: 诉责险主观过错因果关系 Litigation Liability Insurance Subjective Fault Causality
摘要: 诉责险中,因申请人错误申请财产保全而给被申请人带来的损失,其本质上属于侵权行为,认定申请人是否承担赔偿责任应适用一般过错原则,也即需满足:申请人实施了侵权行为、主观上申请人具有故意或重大过失、客观上给被申请人造成了损失、侵权行为与损失结果之间具有因果关系四大要件。本文通过筛选最高院财产保全损害责任纠纷案例,总结出司法实践中诉责险争议焦点并作主流观点总结,以期有助于最高院对财产保全侵权的认定。
Abstract: In litigation liability insurance, the losses caused to the respondent by the applicant’s wrongful application for property preservation are essentially infringing acts, and the general fault principle should be applied to determine whether the applicant is liable for compensation, that is, the following requirements should be met. There are four elements: the applicant has committed an act of infringement, the applicant has intentionally or grossly negligent, the applicant has objectively caused losses to the respondent, and there is a causal relationship between the tort and the result of loss. By screening the cases of the Supreme People’s Court’s property preservation damage liability disputes, this paper summarizes the focus of the litigation liability insurance disputes in judicial practice and summarizes the mainstream views, in order to help the Supreme People’s Court to identify the property preservation infringement.
文章引用:何家颐. 诉责险典型争点及裁判立场解析[J]. 争议解决, 2023, 9(6): 2691-2697. https://doi.org/10.12677/DS.2023.96367

参考文献

[1] 陆鹏. 引入诉讼财产保全责任保险 完善法院诉讼保全担保机制[J]. 上海保险, 2016(3): 55-57.
[2] 皮立波. 责任保险和保证保险的区别探讨[J]. 保险理论与实践, 2016(3): 20-26.
[3] 乔石. 论诉讼财产保全保险的模式选择[J]. 湖北社会科学, 2017(10): 138-146.
[4] 孙钰祥. 诉讼财产保全责任保险可行性研究[J]. 上海保险, 2017(1): 53-58.
[5] 吴在存. 在财产保全中引入责任保险担保的路径及其价值[J]. 人民法治, 2016(9): 49-51.
[6] 周佳星. 诉讼财产保全责任保险: 面临的障碍与法律对策[J]. 保险理论与实践, 2017(3): 100-110.
[7] 罗筱琦. 诉讼保险制度再探[J]. 现代法学, 2016(4): 95-99.
[8] 宫峰元, 董一梁. 德国法律保障险及其对中国的借鉴[J]. 保险研究, 2015(1): 84-88.
[9] 刘君博. 财产保全责任险保险费承担机制研究[J]. 法学杂志, 2020(6): 89-99.