As one of the most distinctive characteristics of English insurance law, the duty of utmost good faith is essentially stated in sections 17-20 of the Marine Insurance Act 1906. According to the statutory rules, both of the insurance parties must observe utmost good faith before the conclusion of an insurance contract. After one century of its application, both the judiciary and academics expressed their concerns in terms of its legislative defects and complexity in practice. Some developments have been made in recent judicial decisions and in statutory reform, e.g. the English Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act 2012, and Recommendations, Statutes and Explanations on the Amendments of Chinese Maritime Code of the People’s Republic of China. Therefore, debatable issues and law reform programs in both English and Chinese law are considered in the main body of this thesis. The examination is essentially based upon, (1) the materiality test of the concealed/misrepresented circumstances which can empower the injured party to rescind the insurance abinitio; (2) the duration of utmost good faith and specific issues; (3) the protective measures related to innocent misconduct; (4) the legal status of good faith and its application to fraudulent behaviour; and (5) whether the classic English utmost good faith doctrine can be extended to Chinese law. Therefore, the main objective of this thesis is to provide a comprehensive study of the current status and developments of the duty of utmost good faith in both English and Chinese law, which is of fundamental importance, not only at the negotiation stage, but also throughout the performance and at the claiming stage of an insurance contract. After identifying and analysing these crucial issues, this thesis concludes with some possible solutions.

La pratique des assurances maritimes est étroitement liée au commerce maritime : elle en suit les mouvances jusqu’à en acquérir une autonomie concrétisée par le mouvement de colonisation. En effet, la colonisation française, réalisée dans un but de domination politique mais surtout de prospérité économique de la métropole, contribue au développement des assurances. Le contrat d’assurance offre une protection aux échanges commerciaux maritimes contre les risques survenant sur mer le plaçant au cœur de l’économie du XVIIIe au XIXe siècle. Il apparaît comme une nécessité notamment pour les îles situées aux Antilles ou dans l’océan Indien pour lesquelles le commerce se fait exclusivement par navire. Envisager les risques maritimes sous le prisme de l’assureur permet de constater que même si les transactions avec les colonies favorisent la multiplication des assurances, les gouvernements successifs attribuent de façon exclusive la législation et la pratique des assurances à la métropole. Il en ressort une politique coloniale commerciale au seul profit de la métropole, excluant toute tentative d’appropriation des colons de la pratique de l’assurance maritime. Cette idée se confirme dès la phase de souscription du contrat d’assurance lors de la détermination des risques que l’assureur se propose de garantir et se poursuit lorsque le risque se réalise et qu’il doit intervenir pour réparer le sinistre. La spécificité coloniale se traduit donc par une mainmise de la métropole sur cette matière même si les assureurs doivent prendre en compte les caractéristiques des échanges maritimes avec les colonies. / The practice of maritime insurance was closely linked to maritime commerce, particularly that concerning the colonies. French colonization, undertaken for reasons of political domination but especially in the interest of the economic prosperity of the home country, contributed to the development of insurance. Insurance contracts offered protection against the risks arising at sea, placing them at the heart of the economy of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. This insurance was necessary in particular for islands located in the Antilles or in the Indian Ocean, where trade was exclusively conducted by ship. Even though the commerce with the colonies increased the necessity of insurance, the successive French governments reserved legislation and the practice of insurance to the home country. The colonial commercial policy only benefited the home country, excluding settlers from the practice of maritime insurance. This was the case, starting with the formulation of the insurance contract when determining the risks which the insurer would guarantee, and continuing in case of accident and claims made.

誠信原則(bona fides, good faith)之法律意義，源於羅馬法善意衡平及一般惡意抗辯原則，後成為現代大陸法系國家之帝王條款。誠信原則以其特殊具體性、補充性、限制性與修正性之功能，可作為調整智識與交易實力不對等當事人間利益之最佳方式，其適用可使雙方當事人之利益獲得平衡。於普通法系國家，美國法已接受誠信原則，英國普通法未明文承認誠信原則之適用，但其有相當多制度顯現出誠信原則之概念，於特定法律之領域亦承認誠信原則，其著名之1906年海上保險法即早已承認最大誠信原則之適用。 保險制度發始於海上保險，其發展進程係「先海上保險，後陸上保險；先財產保險，後人身保險」。海上保險於有文字記載之保險歷史，先以共同海損之危險分担，繼則為以數理統計之危險分散與轉嫁。保險具射倖性，從海上保險發展時起，保險人即受資訊不對稱之影響。當時科技、通訊設備不足，保險人欲獲得足夠資訊決定是否承保與計算保險費率，進而預測經營成本，實際係難以達成。當時被保險人掌握有關保險標的之相關資訊，而保險人卻一無所知。資訊不對稱對保險人產生逆選擇與道德危險等危害，為解決此問題，保險人遂要求被保險人就保險標的之相關資訊，依據誠信原則為主動告知，或以擔保條款等方式控制風險。如被保險人未按誠信原則盡告知義務，無須探究其主觀意圖為何、是否有因果關係，賦予保險人得解除契約之嚴厲效果。 現代保險制度始於歐陸義大利之城邦國家，其後輾轉流傳至英國，並於英國成長茁壯而成為現今之保險制度。英國自十七世紀承襲形成於義大利城邦海上保險之慣例，及拿破崙法典之規定，於1906年完成海上保險之立法。至今百餘年間雖時易勢遷、物換星移，其絕大部分條文不僅成為海上保險之鐵則，且為世界各國廣泛接受運用於保險法制。其至今未曾有所更易，並為世界各保險先進國家奉為圭臬。聯合國貿易暨發展委員會於1982年曾稱英國海上保險法及保險條款為實際之國際法，足見其高度權威性及深遠之影響力。 十八世紀當時，保險尚屬初發展階段，當時科學技術並未發達，為使保險人得就其所承保風險與收取保險費達到對價平衡，英國自1766年Carter v. Boehm案，即確立誠信原則於海上保險之適用，要求被保險人為主動告知保險標的之風險。其指出保險契約為射倖性契約，賴以估算危險發生機率之各特定事項，唯被保險人知之最稔，保險人於決定承保與否時，有賴被保險人之告知。被保險人故意隱匿，將導致保險人對危險之錯誤估計，是被保險人之故意隱匿構成對保險人之詐欺，應使契約歸於無效。某事項之不為告知或可能出於錯誤，被保險人亦不具任何詐欺之意圖，但對保險人而言，仍屬受有欺罔，與故意隱匿並無二致，保險契約於此情形不應認為有效。誠信原則對所有契約均應適用，於保險契約尤甚於其他契約。於此原則下，保險契約當事人任何一方就其個人所知有關危險之事項，不被容許對其有所隱匿。誠信原則其後經英國司法實務之運作轉變為最大誠信原則(uberrima fidei, utmost good faith)，於英國1906年上保險法第17條規定。英國海上保險法之最大誠信原則，其本即源於歐陸法律體系之誠信原則。然因英國普通法並未承認誠信原則，且海上保險原為商人間之保險，其遂借用於中世紀所演化出之商人應具有高度誠信原則之概念於海上保險之領域。誠信原則於英國海上保險法百餘年運作後，成為最大誠信原則並發展出各種具體之制度，然英國實務運作僅偏向對被保險人之嚴格適用。然按Mansfield大法官之見解與英國海上保險法之規定，保險契約雙方當事人均應有此原則之適用。 保險制度經過長期發展後，保險人經由豐富統計資料為基礎之精算技術，先進之科學設備，完善且充足之人力資源，對於各種風險加以了解，甚而其可較被保險人更清楚保險標的之風險。又保險之運作高度、複雜、專業發展後，除少數大型企業有能力與保險人洽商保險契約條款之內容外，大部分仍使用定型化契約作為保險交易之內容，被保險人對於保險契約之條款內容難以了解。保險產業已從過往對於保險人資訊不對稱，轉為對被保險人資訊不對稱之情形。因此過往法律對於嚴格要求被保險人為告知且賦與嚴厲法律效果，現已使保險契約雙方當事人利益失衡之局面，且最大誠信原則已成為海上保險人藉以逃避責任之最佳利器。 時序進入二十世紀後，各國有關保險之立法，已開始著重對被保險人之保障，尤其對消費者而言更應如此。美國Robert Keeton教授於上世紀六十年代提出之合理期待原則，德國於1976年之標準契約條款解釋之法律(後已整編至德國民法規定)、2008年修正之保險契約法，法國保險契約法、澳洲1984年制定之一般保險契約法、北歐各國保險契約法、歐洲2009年8月由學者所擬就之保險契約法重述、中國2009年10月新修正之保險法等，均朝向保障被保險人之權益，減輕其負擔，加重保險人於最大誠信原則下之義務為規範。本文認為其雖係對一般保險契約法之修正，但對於海上保險契約，尤其無能力與保險人協商保險契約條款之當事人，應可加以參酌適用。英國自上世紀中葉起，開始就該國海上保險與一般保險之法制加以檢討，並提出各種討論報告。於2009年12月已就消費者保險之改革提出草案，對於消費者保險採詢問回答之方式，其適用於訂約前與續約之時，消費者需以客觀合理之注意避免為不實之說明。過往海上保險之最大誠信原則於所有保險之訂約前適用，現於所提出之草案就消費者保險改採合理注意之義務，並應注意及各種實際之情況決定，藉以改善過往對消費者過於嚴苛之情況。本草案就訂約後最大誠信原則之適用則未有影響，而對其他種類保險之討論則尚未定案。 英國海上保險法之最大誠信原則經百餘年之實務運作、學者詮釋及各國之立法擴張後，已成為對整體保險契約條款是否公平合理之判斷準據。然最大誠信原則之嚴苛應用與法律效果，因時易變遷各國均予以緩和，並加強保護被保險人。因而被保險人除有故意詐欺或重大過失，而未盡告知義務，得由保險人主張解除契約外，於無可歸責或過失之情況，則分別規定其法律效果。且於消費者保險採取詢問回答之方式，並採用比例補償原則。於海上保險等有能力與保險人洽商保險契約條款之商人保險，則仍維持主動告知義務。然如其因不可歸責之原因而未盡告知義務，保險人不得主張解除契約。而商人保險因有諸多變動之風險因素，採用比例補償之原則尚有困難。 我國海商法規定之海上保險，就被保險人告知義務未為規定。按同法之規定，其未規定者可準用保險法規定。我國學說及實務，均肯認保險契約為基於最大誠信原則之契約，並認為保險法第64條之規定為此原則之具體表現。然國內相關就最大誠信原則之討論亦如英國法制，著重於被保險人之適用範圍。對於最大誠信原則應用於保險人之部分，則似較少觸及。有學者早期已強調保險人應依據最大誠信原則盡調查義務，其後有學者於著述中略論及保險人於最大誠信原則下之告知義務，我國法律則對於此部分未加以規範。本篇論文對於最大誠信原則於保險人之應用，以專章加以論述。本文認為加強保險人於最大誠信原則之告知義務等，對於保障被保險人之權益將有所助益，且其與保險契約之特殊解釋規則適用有重要之關連。如保險人盡其告知義務，就保險契約之爭執將可大幅減少，並可降低該等特殊解釋規則之適用。我國保險法第64條規定就故意隱匿、過失遺漏或不實說明與危險發生無因果關係由被保險人負擔舉證責任，被保險人之負擔過重。本文建議應將舉證責任歸由保險人負擔，較符公平之原則。又實務中，海上船體保險或船東互保協會保險，保險人均先行要求被保險人就其所提供之問題回答，因此本文建議於海上保險可由保險人先以詢問回答之方式，要求被保險人就保險標的之資訊為告知。但被保險人知悉保險人所未詢問之重要事項者，亦應為主動告知。如保險人證明被保險人有故意隱匿或重大過失不為告知時，始得解除契約，並保有保險費。如無故意隱匿或重大過失時，如保險人證明危險發生係因該未告知之事實所致者，保險人不附補償責任。於非使用保險人所提供之定型化契約條款者，當事人間得就此另行約定。 本文以海上保險之最大誠信原則適用為主，對相關問題加以討論。第壹章說明研究動機、目的、方法與範圍，並對於海上保險之緣起、保險之特性、保險契約之解釋、保險契約交易之特性加以討論。第貳章對於誠信原則之發展、基本概念與功能及適用、於海上保險之發展加以說明。第参章就最大誠信原則於海上保險之適用加以論述，其中就英國現行法制之部分詳為討論。第肆章則對最大誠信原則於英國法之發展，並就該國之檢討報告詳細討論說明。於参、肆章之討論，均以英國海上保險法制之規定為主軸，並輔以其他國家法律之內容。第伍章就最大誠信原則於保險人之適用加以討論，著重於保險人依最大誠信原則之告知義務、理賠程序之告知義務、告知義務之限制與範圍、告知義務與特殊解釋規則之關聯、迅速理賠之義務等。英國海上保險法就此少有論及，美國與歐陸法律對此於非海上保險加以強調。本文認為保險人於理賠程序之告知與迅速理賠之義務，亦應於海上保險加以適用，方可顯現海上保險為基於最大誠信原則之本質。第六章則綜合前揭數章之討論，對於我國海上保險法制提出修法之建議，以供未來修法之參考。

Thesis (doctoral)--Universität, Hamburg, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (p. [215]-225) and index.

Le transport maritime qui est une des modalités du commerce .international, a pu se développer grâce à l'assurance maritime. Compte tenu de la technicité et de son caractère international, les litiges en matière d'assurance maritime ont été souvent réglés par voie d'arbitrage. Le recours à l'arbitrage en assurance maritime peut être à l'occasion d'un litige entre assureur/assuré assureur subrogé/tiers responsable, assureur/réassureur etc. Cette étude porte sur ces différents litiges tel que soumis à l'arbitrage el leurs spécificités, il conviendra d'étudier ce sujet dans un cadre comparatif entre le droit français, marocain et anglais. Par ailleurs, l'approche du sujet par la méthode comparative nous permet1ra de découvrir les solutions concrètes finalement retenues dans les trois systèmes juridiques en question tout en rapprochant cela au débat doctrinal et jurisprudentiel relatif à cette question. / Maritime transport, which is an inherent part of international trade, has been able to develop due mainly to marine insurance. Marine insurance disputes, given their technical nature and their international character, have been often settled by arbitration. The use of arbitration in marine insurance may be in the course of litigation between insurer and insured, subrogated insurer and a responsible third party, insurer and reinsurer, etc. This study deals with aspects peculiar to maritime law and various disputes submitted to arbitration. This thesis delves into the comparison of French. Moroccan and English laws. Moreover, the comparative approach to the subject will allow us, while bringing it closer to the doctrinal and jurisprudential debate, to discover the concrete settlements reached in the three legal systems in question.

The present licentiate thesis analyses developments in Swedish marine insurance during the interwar period, including both direct marine insurance and marine reinsurance. This is done in order to provide insights on how companies of a highly internationalised and vulnerable line of insurance were affected by and responded to new risks during a period of far-reaching international financial and economic crises. Finally, the consequences of new risks and strategies are assessed. This thesis argues that during the interwar period Swedish maritime trade and Swedish marine insurance greatly depended on each other for marine insurance cover and marine insurance premium incomes. The business results in Swedish marine insurance partly depended on the development of Swedish trade. These business results were also vulnerable to currency risks. Swedish marine insurers faced no similar trade or currency risks during the two decades preceding World War I, and accordingly the returns on Swedish marine insurance were lower during the interwar period than during the last two pre-war decades. These factors probably bore their most severe consequences during the early 1920s when Swedish marine insurance on average induced losses to insurers. The remaining years of the period constituted a long-run recovery, and the Great Depression of the early 1930s caused no difficulties of the same order. This thesis also indicates that interwar Swedish marine insurers responded to new risks by increasing the level of cession to reinsurers. Another response was to increase the level of differentiation among insurance lines. This thesis describes the consequences of new risks and strategies in interwar Swedish marine insurance, focusing on the development of the Swedish marine insurance market structure and on the business results of Swedish marine insurers. Though this market shrunk and grew excessively, the relative importance of stock and mutual insurers showed only minor fluctuations. The importance of specialised marine reinsurance companies, however, fluctuated greatly. Also, cooperation between interwar marine insurers and the formation of insurance groups set new trends of concentration for the future. Finally, even though Swedish marine insurance during some years induced losses the Swedish marine insurers never experienced true losses on their total businesses.

The thesis diploma is focused on the issue of insurance in maritime transport of goods from international point of view. Marine insurance is very important part of sea transport and belongs among the most important components of its smooth functioning. The objective of the thesis diploma is to introduce and explain the topic of marine insurance in comprehensive manner, using domestic and foreing law, literature and judicial decisions. The thesis diploma is focused on English law which is considered to be the most developed in this field. The reason I chose this topic is my personal interest in both marine insurance and sea transport, since I consider both fields to be very important part of international commerce. The first chapter is dedicated to the definition of relevant terms, subsumption of sea transport into a legal framework of carriage and forwardning relations and division of sea transport. The first chapter provides as well a list of important legal enactments relevant to the topic of the thesis diploma. The second chapter is the core of the work, since it provides closer explanation of the contract of insurance in Czech and English law. In terms of the second chapter the work pays attention to the process of formation of insurance contracts in English law, and to the importance of a...

University of Macau / Faculty of Law

La subrogation est un mode privilégié de transmission des créances en assurance maritime. Elle met en présence les principaux acteurs du commerce maritime : l'assuré, l'assureur et le tiers responsable. La subrogation de l'assureur maritime a toujours bénéficié d'une faveur particulière se traduisant par la souplesse des textes juridiques aussi bien pour la subrogation légale qui s'exerce de plein droit par le seul fait de la loi, que pour la subrogation conventionnelle qui procède de la volonté des parties. Cependant, face aux exigences procédurales des juridictions, le contentieux de la subrogation tend davantage vers un durcissement. Dès lors, la question se pose de savoir s'il existe d'autres alternatives pour l'assureur maritime ? Le recours à l'arbitrage constitue une bonne solution au regard de la souplesse des sentences rendues en la matière. Aussi, la jurisprudence judiciaire fait état d'une grande évolution qui porterait les assureurs vers des moyens de droit commun, entre autres, la cession de créance, la répétition de l'indû et l'action "de in rem verso" pour pallier l'incertitude du contentieux de la subrogation. Sur le plan du droit international privé, il n'y a pas de règle spécifique à la subrogation de l'assureur maritime. Mais, les Règlements Rome I et Rome II édictent des mécanismes de conflits de lois applicables aux relations contractuelles et extra contractuelles. Ils désignent la loi qui régit la subrogation / Subrogation is a privileged mode of transmission of claims in marine insurance. It brings together key players in the maritime trade: the insured, the insurer and the third party responsible. Subrogation of the underwriter has always enjoyed a special favor resulting flexibility of legal texts both for subrogation exerted automatically by the fact of the law, for contractual subrogation which proceeds the will of the parties. However, faced with the procedural requirements of the courts, litigation of subrogation tends more toward a cure. Therefore, the question arises of whether if there are other alternatives to the underwriter? The arbitration is a good solution in terms of the flexibility of awards made in the matter. Also, judicial jurisprudence reported a great change that would insurers to ordinary means, among other things, the assignment, the repetition of the undue and action "de in rem verso" to overcome the uncertainty of litigation of subrogation. In terms of private international law, there is no specific rule of subrogation of the marine insurer. However, the Regulations Rome I and Rome II enact conflict mechanisms applicable to contractual and extra-contractual. They designate the law that governs subrogation

十九世紀英國經濟活動、社會結構及工藝技術發生重大變革，船舶所有人從事海上運送活動所面臨之責任風險，種類繁多且金額甚鉅，非其能獨自承擔而有轉嫁風險之必要，船舶所有人防護及補償保險遂應運而生，迄今已有一百五十餘年之歷史。 船舶所有人防護及補償保險，乃由船舶所有人組成非營利性之防護及補償協會，以相互保險之方式承保船舶所有人之責任風險，其承保範圍廣泛，包括船員及旅客傷病死亡責任、人命救助之費用及報酬、貨物責任、船舶碰撞責任、污染責任、船舶拖帶責任、船骸移除責任、共同海損分攤額、檢疫費用、罰金、損害防阻及法律費用等等。 船舶所有人透過船舶所有人防護及補償保險之安排，轉嫁龐大之責任風險，使海上運送活動得以存續，船舶所有人防護及補償保險之貢獻重大，已成為海上保險不可或缺之一環，其重要性並不亞於船體保險及貨物保險。惟目前我國學界關於船舶所有人防護及補償保險之文獻極為有限，且多數文獻因論著年代較為久遠，部分內容已與現況有所差異。 鑒於船舶所有人防護及補償保險之重要性，本文乃以英國不列顛防護及補償協會之2007年協會規則為主要研究對象，並以相關國際公約、英國法及我國法為研究範圍，自法律層面分析探討船舶所有人防護及補償保險之意義、功能、歷史沿革、法律架構、契約之成立與效力及其承保範圍，建立船舶所有人防護及補償保險之概念與體系論述，以期能達成協助船舶所有人瞭解並維護其關於船舶所有人防護及補償保險之各項權益、引起國內學界對船舶所有人防護及補償保險之重視與研究興趣、俾利國內航運保險相關主管機關對航運業轉嫁責任風險之行政監理及對我國船舶所有人組成防護及補償協會可行性之評估等研究目的。