摘要
在投保人“欺诈性误述”情形下,《保险法》第十六条的解除权与《民法典》第一百四十八条的撤销权发生竞合,但现行法律及司法解释未明确其适用规则,导致司法裁判标准不统一。二者在构成要件、调整范围和法律后果上存在显著区别,是相互独立的法律制度,不应简单适用“特别法优于一般法”原则。建议从制度竞合视角出发,通过司法解释明确保险人撤销权的适用,允许选择适用《保险法》第十六条或《民法典》第一百四十八条,并将《保险法》中的解除权改为撤销权,以化解法律冲突,平衡保险人与投保人利益,实现法律适用的统一与公平。
In cases of the insuredsfraudulent misrepresentation a concurrence arises between the right to terminate under Article 16 of the Insurance Law and the right to rescind under Article 148 of the Civil Code.Current laws and judicial interpretations lack clear guidance leading to inconsistent judicial standards.These two rights are independent legal systems with significant differences in constitu-tive requirements regulatory scope and legal consequences and the simple application of the principle thatspecial law prevails over gen-eral law is inappropriate.This paper suggests that from the perspective of institutional concurrence judicial interpretations should clarify the application of the insurers right to rescind allow the choice between Article 16 of the Insurance Law or Article 148 of the Civil Code and amend theright to terminate in the Insurance Law toright to rescind so as to resolve legal conflicts balance the interests of insur-ers and the insured and achieve unified and fair legal application.
作者
忽一帆
余晓宇
Hu Yifan;Yu Xiaoyu(School of Business Xinyang Vocational and Technical College,Xinyang 464000)
出处
《西部学刊》
2025年第15期56-59,共4页
Journal of Western
关键词
保险解除
合同撤销权
制度竞合
欺诈性误述
insurance termination
contract rescission right
institutional concurrence
fraudulent misrepresentation
