Global ETD Search

61	團體壽險暨相關法律問題研究 / A study on Group life insurance and related legal issues 李琬鈴, Lee, Wan Ling Unknown Date (has links) 團體壽險是員工福利思潮下之產物，至今已成為分散、轉嫁企業人身及責任風險不可或缺之風險管理工具。而團體壽險以一張保險單承保多數被保險人，此項「團體」之特性使其在核保、保險費、部分有效性及契約條款之設計上，有別於一般之人壽保險。目前，各家保險公司之團體壽險保險單悉以主管機關制訂之「團體一年定期人壽保險單示範條款」為依據。此示範條款以團體為要保人、團體成員為被保險人，將團體壽險定位為由第三人訂立之人壽保險契約，使團體壽險契約受到欠缺保險利益而無效、有無保險法第一○五條之適用及指定、變更受益人之權利人為誰之質疑。其次，團體壽險契約條款中的保險契約構成部分條款、被保險人資格條款、保險契約終止條款、契約轉換權條款、免責條款及不可抗爭條款等亦存在諸多問題，實有檢討予以修正之必要。因此，本文乃以探討示範條款所涉法律爭議問題為中心，參酌國內學說見解並比較美國判例及美國保險監理官協會所制訂之「團體壽險定義及標準條款模範法案」，對團體壽險契約條款之增訂及修正提出七項建議，包括重新定位團體壽險契約當事人、重視逆選擇防範及被保險人權益保障、明訂兩年不可抗爭期間及團體信用壽險不適用契約轉換權條款及受益人條款、修正個別被保險人保險契約終止之時點及保險人免責事由等，希冀本文之淺見能使示範條款更為完善。 / Group life insurance arises from the thought that employers have the responsibilities to take care of their employees. Until now, group life insurance has become an important part of industries’ risk management plans for distributing and transferring industries’ life and liability risk. Group life insurance insures more than five persons in one policy, and this “group” characteristic makes group life insurance different from general life insurance in many aspects: underwriting, premiums, partly effective and contract clauses. Presently, provisions of group life policies are based on“Model Provisions for Group Yearly Term life Policies”promulgated by competent authority. According to Article 2 of the model provisions, the policyholder is the “group”, and the members of the group are insureds. In other words, group life insurance is entered into by third party. This causes three problems needed to be solved: (1) If the policyholder has no insurable interest in the insured, shall group life insurance be void? (2) Is Article 105 of Insurance Act applicable to group life insurance? (3) Who has the right to designate or change the beneficiary? In addition, there are still some problems in other model provisions including the entire-contract provision, eligibility requirements provision, termination provision, conversion provision, exception clause and incontestability provision. It is necessary to review and revise the model provisions. Therefore, this study focuses on related legal issues of the model provisions. Referring to scholars’ opinions and comparing American verdicts and “Group Life Insurance Definition and Group Life Insurance Standard Provisions Model Act” issued by The National Association of Insurance Commissioners, this study concludes by providing several suggestions in revising the model provisions: (1) The policyholder and the insured should be referred to as members of the group, not “group”. (2) Emphasize on preventing adverse-selection and protecting the insured’s right. (3) Augment incontestable period of two years and a clause which provides that conversion provision and beneficiary provision are not applicable to credit group life insurance. (4) Revise the termination provision and exception clause. Hope these suggestions will make the model provisions more perfect. 團體壽險示範條款風險管理雇主責任保險利益受益人保險證契約轉換權被保險人資格保險契約終止 Group Life Insurance Standard Provision Risk Management Employer’s Liability Insurable Interests Beneficiary Certificate Conversion Right Insured Requirement Termination of Insurance Contract
62	Enkele opmerkings oor die wesenlikheidsvereiste in die lig van Qilingele v South African Mutual Life Assurance Society 1993(1) SA 69(A) Strydom, Johan Joost 06 1900 (has links) Summaries in English and Afrikaans / Wanvoorstelling van wesenlike feite deur omiss/o aan 'n versekeraar kan tot gevolg he dat die versekeringskontrak ongeldig verklaar word ingevolge die gemene reg. In Mutual and Federal Insurance Co Ltd v Oudtshoorn Municipality 1985 (1) SA 419 (A) is beslis dat wesenlikheid bepaal moet word vanuit die oogpunt van die redelike man. In 'n paging om bewys van die wesenlikheid van feite te vermy, het versekeraars vereis dat aansoekers die voorstellings in die kontrak moat waarborg. Dit het tot gevolg gehad dat voorstellings wat in die kontrak gewaarborg is outomaties wesenlik was. Sedert die invoering van artikel 63(3) van die Versekeringswet 27 van 1943 deur die wetgewer gedurende 1969, is die wesenlikheid van voorstellings egter 'n vereiste, selfs waar dit in die kontrak gewaarborg is. Versekeraars sou dus in die toekoms nie agter kontraktuele wanvoorstellings kon skuil nie. Hierdie maatreel het meer beskerming aan die versekerde gebied. In Qilingele v South African Mutual Life Assurance Society 1993 (1) SA 69 (A) is die toets vir wesenlikheid, soos vereis deur artikel 63{3), aangespreek. Dit het die vraag laat ontstaan of daar twee aparte toetse vir wesenlikheid bestaan, naamlik gemeenregtelik en statuter, en of daar een algemene toets bestaan. / Misrepresentation by omissio of material facts to an insurer may lead to an insurance contract being declared invalid in terms of the common law. In Mutual and Federal Insurance v Oudtshoorn Municipality 1985 (1) SA 419 (A) it was decided to determine materiality in the eyes of the reasonable man. To avoid proving materiality of facts, the insurers required proposers to warrant the representations in the contract. This resulted in the facts automatically being material. In 1969 parliament, .however, enacted section 63(3) of the Insurance Act 27 of 1943 whereby materiality of presentations, even where it was warranted in the contract, became a requirement. Therefore insurers could in future not hide behind contractual misrepresentations. This provided more protection to the insured. Qilingele v SA Mutual Life Assurance Society 1993 (1) SA 69 (A) addresses the test for materiality as required by section 63(3). This resulted in the question whether two separate tests for materiality in terms of common law and statute, or only one exists. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL.M. Representations Material facts Insurance contract Misrepresentations Warranty Tests for materiality Duty of disclosure Omissio 346.8632068 Insurance law -- South Africa
63	Eléments de théorie du risque en finance et assurance / Elements of risk theory in finance and insurance Mostoufi, Mina 17 December 2015 (has links) Cette thèse traite de la théorie du risque en finance et en assurance. La mise en pratique du concept de comonotonie, la dépendance du risque au sens fort, est décrite pour identifier l’optimum de Pareto et les allocations individuellement rationnelles Pareto optimales, la tarification des options et la quantification des risques. De plus, il est démontré que l’aversion au risque monotone à gauche, un raffinement pertinent de l’aversion forte au risque, caractérise tout décideur à la Yaari, pour qui, l’assurance avec franchise est optimale. Le concept de comonotonie est introduit et discuté dans le chapitre 1. Dans le cas de risques multiples, on adopte l’idée qu’une forme naturelle pour les compagnies d’assurance de partager les risques est la Pareto optimalité risque par risque. De plus, l’optimum de Pareto et les allocations individuelles Pareto optimales sont caractérisées. Le chapitre 2 étudie l’application du concept de comonotonie dans la tarification des options et la quantification des risques. Une nouvelle variable de contrôle de la méthode de Monte Carlo est introduite et appliquée aux “basket options”, aux options asiatiques et à la TVaR. Finalement dans le chapitre 3, l’aversion au risque au sens fort est raffinée par l’introduction de l’aversion au risque monotone à gauche qui caractérise l’optimalité de l’assurance avec franchise dans le modèle de Yaari. De plus, il est montré que le calcul de la franchise s’effectue aisément. / This thesis deals with the risk theory in Finance and Insurance. Application of the Comonotonicity concept, the strongest risk dependence, is described for identifying the Pareto optima and Individually Rational Pareto optima allocations, option pricing and quantification of risk. Furthermore it is shown that the left monotone risk aversion, a meaningful refinement of strong risk aversion, characterizes Yaari’s decision makers for whom deductible insurance is optimal. The concept of Comonotonicity is introduced and discussed in Chapter 1. In case of multiple risks, the idea that a natural way for insurance companies to optimally share risks is risk by risk Pareto-optimality is adopted. Moreover, the Pareto optimal and individually Pareto optimal allocations are characterized. The Chapter 2 investigates the application of the Comonotonicity concept in option pricing and quantiﬁcation of risk. A novel control variate Monte Carlo method is introduced and its application is explained for basket options, Asian options and TVaR. Finally in Chapter 3 the strong risk aversion is refined by introducing the left-monotone risk aversion which characterizes the optimality of deductible insurance within the Yaari’s model. More importantly, it is shown that the computation of the deductible is tractable. Partage de risque multivarié Comonotonicité Optimum de Pareto individuellement Variable de contrôle Méthode de Monte-Carlo Modèle de Yaari Left monotone risk aversion de Jewitt Optimalité du contrat de franchise Multivariate risk sharing Comonotonicity Individually Rational Pareto optima Control variate Monte Carlo method Yaari’s model Left-monotone risk aversion Optimal insurance contract 510 338.5
64	Selected legal aspects of liability insurance Jacobs, Wenette 01 1900 (has links) Liability insurance concerns an insured’s insurance of its legal liability towards a third party for the latter’s loss. This specialised type of insurance is rather neglected in South African insurance law. There is a lack of understanding of the intricacies of liability insurance and its unique challenges. This flows primarily from its complex nature as third-party insurance, which involves legal obligations between multiple parties, and a lack of statutory regulation of the distinctive contractual aspects of liability insurance. Furthermore, limited authority exists on contentious legal aspects as a result of the relatively small number of judicial decisions in this field of law. It is also evident that liability insurance constantly evolves as new grounds of liability emerge and new insurance products develop in response to the changing demands of society. The rise of consumerism and the increase in third-party claims amplify the economic significance of the law of liability insurance in South Africa. A substantial knowledge gap remains in our jurisprudence, irrespective of the recent introduction of new statutory instruments aimed at regulating insurance practice in general. These reforms have not as yet been applied critically to liability insurance, and no specialised legislation in South Africa regulates aspects of this branch of insurance as is the case with microinsurance. The focus in this thesis is on two main issues: the insurer’s duty effectively to indemnify the insured, and the insurer’s defence and settlement of third-party claims brought against the insured. As a subsidiary theme, this thesis analyses legal uncertainties that may persist during pre-contractual negotiations, the liability insurance contract lifecycle, and even after the expiry of the contract. Legal challenges can be addressed by novel and creative application of the national law. Potential solutions can be gleaned from the other progressive jurisdictions reviewed – English and Belgian law. It is evident that this research may prompt Parliament to develop specific rules and regulations for liability insurance contract law. This thesis includes a check list of some of the most important disclosure duties for procuring liability insurance cover, its operation, and claims processes. / Mercantile Law / LL.D. Claims-made policy Duration of liability cover Disclosure Duty to indemnify Hybrid policy Indemnity insurance Insured defendant Legal liability Liability insurance Liability insurance contract Liability insured Liability insurer Right or duty to defend or settle Third-party insurance Third-party plaintiff Third-party claim Occurrence-based policy 346.865068
65	船舶所有人防護及補償保險之研究 / Study on Protection and Indemnity (P&I) Insurance for Shipowner 張培倫, Chang, Pei Lun Unknown Date (has links) 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。防護及補償協會防護及補償保險補償保險海上保險相互保險保險契約船舶所有人責任運送人責任代位權 P&I club P&I insurance indemnity insurance marine insurance mutual insurance insurance contract shipowners’liability carriers’ liability rights of subrogation
66	Försäkringsskydd för skadeståndsansvar vid dataskyddsöverträdelser : En undersökning av försäkringsvillkorens omfattning och eventuella begränsningar i förhållande till art. 82 GDPR och grupptalan / Insurance coverage for liability in case of data protection breaches : An investigation into the extent and potential limitations of insurance terms in relation to art. 82 GDPR and class action lawsuits Nahlbom, Robin January 2024 (has links) I uppsatsen utreds försäkringsskyddet för skadeståndsansvar vid dataskyddsöverträdelser. GDPR är den centrala regleringen för personuppgiftsbehandling och fastställer ett antal principer som måste upprätthållas för att den ansvarige ska få behandla personuppgifter. Bryter den ansvarige mot förordningens principer har den registrerade rätt att kräva skadestånd enligt art. 82.1 GDPR. Förordningen fastställer tre kumulativa krav som måste vara uppfyllda för att skadeståndsskyldighet ska föreligga. Det innefattar att en överträdelse av GDPR har skett, att materiell eller immateriell skada till följd av denna överträdelse har uppstått och att det föreligger ett orsakssamband mellan skadan och överträdelsen. Förordningen innehåller även en bestämmelse som tar över medlemsstaternas nationella skadeståndsrättsliga bestämmelser, vilket innebär att GDPR ska tillämpas enligt sin ordalydelse och att de kumulativa kraven enligt art. 82.1 GDPR måste följas. Det innebär att nationella skadeståndsrättsliga begrepp inte bör jämställas med begrepp som framgår av art. 82.1 GDPR eftersom begreppen har tillkommit i en helt annan kontext. Exempelvis översätts i vissa fall materiella och immateriella skador till ekonomiska och ideella skador. Begreppen är inte synonyma och bör inte tillställas samma betydelse eftersom terminologin i art. 82.1 GDPR kan misstolkas. Försäkringsvillkoren som reglerar skadeståndsskyldigheten för dataskyddsöverträdelser och som även hänvisar till art. 82.1 GDPR, innehåller i vissa fall nationella skadeståndsrättsliga begrepp och även andra begrepp som inte framgår av förordningen. Det kan leda till att kongruensen mellan villkorens utformning och förordningens ordalydelse medför tolkningsproblematik vid bedömning om skadeståndsskyldighet föreligger. Därför bör försäkringsvillkoren endast innehålla sådan terminologi som framgår av art. 82.1 GDPR. Dataskyddsöverträdelser medför oftast att en stor grupp människor lider skada varför förordningen tillåter registrerade att föra grupptalan med hjälp av en ideell organisation enligt art. 80 GDPR. Teoretiskt sett kan skadeståndsbeloppen bli högre än försäkringsbeloppen varför det i sådana fall saknas ett försäkringsskydd för grupptalan för den personuppgiftsansvarige. Försäkringsvillkoren anger däremot ingenting om att försäkringen inte täcker ett sådant anspråk. Därmed ställs försäkringsbolagen inför utmaningen att hantera sådana anspråk, varför försäkringen bör uppdateras för att möta skadestånd i en grupptalan vid dataskyddsöverträdelser. / The essay investigates insurance coverage for liability for damages in the event of data protection breaches. GDPR is the central regulation for the processing of personal data and establishes a number of principles that must be upheld for the data controller to process personal data. If the data controller breaches the principles of the regulation, the data subject has the right to claim damages under Art. 82.1 GDPR. The regulation sets out three cumulative requirements that must be met for liability for damages to arise. This includes that a breach of the GDPR has occurred, that material or immaterial damage as a result of this breach has arisen, and that there is a causal link between the damage and the breach. The regulation also includes a provision that supersedes the national tort law provisions of Member States, which means that the GDPR shall be applied according to its wording and that the cumulative requirements under Art. 82.1 GDPR must be followed. This means that national tort law concepts should not be equated with concepts as set out in Art. 82.1 GDPR as the concepts have arisen in a completely different context. For example, in some cases, material and immaterial damages are translated into economic and non-economic damages. The concepts are not synonymous and should not be attributed the same meaning as the terminology in Art. 82.1 GDPR can be misinterpreted. The insurance terms and conditions that regulate liability for damages in the event of data protection breaches and also refer to Art. 82.1 GDPR, in some cases contain national tort law concepts and other concepts that are not evident in the regulation. This may lead to a lack of congruence between the wording of the terms and conditions and the wording of the regulation, resulting in interpretation issues when assessing whether liability for damages exists. Therefore, the insurance terms and conditions should only contain terminology as set out in Art. 82.1 GDPR. Data protection breaches usually result in harm to a large group of people, which is why the regulation allows data subjects to bring a collective action with the assistance of a not-for-profit organization under Art. 80 GDPR. Theoretically, damages awarded may exceed insurance coverage, which means there is no insurance coverage for collective actions for the data controller in such cases. However, the insurance terms and conditions do not specify that the insurance does not cover such a claim. Therefore, insurance companies are faced with the challenge of handling such claims, which is why the insurance should be updated to cover damages in a collective action in the event of data protection breaches. GDPR General Data Protection Regulation protection Insurances breach insurance Class action lawsuit terms and conditions Personal data Personal data protection Registered Privacy protection Insurance coverage sum insured Damages compensation Tort law Material damages Immaterial damages Violation Economic loss Insurance company European Union Personal Data Act Data integrity Confidentiality Confidentiality protection Information protection Personal data protection Insurance contract Liability for damages Data controller DPO Data processor Compensation for damages Claim for damages Insurance coverage Principles Data protection principles Compliance Insurance compensation Tort law Regulation Directive Law Swedish Authority for Privacy Protection Data protection officer European Data Protection Board Article 29 workgroup Article Article 82 Data controller responsibility Sanctions Administrative fines Data Protection Directive Artikel 82 GDPR Dataskydd Försäkring Försäkringar Databrottsförsäkring Grupptalan Försäkringsvillkor Personuppgift Personuppgifter Personuppgiftsskydd Registrerad Registrerade Integritetsskydd Försäkringsbelopp Skadestånd Skadeståndslag Materiell Immateriell Kränkning Förmögenhetsskada Försäkringsbolag Dataskyddsförordningen EU Personuppgiftslag Dataintegritet Sekretess Sekretessskydd Informationsskydd Personuppgiftsskydd Försäkringsavtal Skadeståndsskyldighet Skadeståndsansvar Personuppgiftsansvarig Personuppgiftsbiträde Skadeståndsersättning Skadeståndskrav Försäkringsskydd Principer Dataskyddsprinciper Regelefterlevnad Försäkringsersättning Skadeståndslagen Förordning Direktiv Lag Integritetsskyddsmyndigheten IMY Dataskyddsombud Data EDPB Artikel 82 Personuppgiftsansvar Sanktioner Sanktionsavgifter Dataskyddsdirektivet DPO Artikel 82 GDPR Artikel 82 Europeiska unionen Law and Society Juridik och samhälle

Page generated in 0.1123 seconds