论文部分内容阅读
近一段时间以来,实施了还不到一年的中国内地机动车交通事故责任强制保险(以下简称‘交强险’)陷入了争议的漩涡之中。4月下旬,北京某律师因认为交强险存在数百亿元的暴利而向中国保除监督管理委日员(以下简称‘保监会’)申请行政复议,在被拒绝受理之后,该律师干脆一纸诉状将保监会告上法庭。不久,另一位律师在经历了一次交通事故之后,开始组织一场全国范围内的交强险征集听证授权委托书活动,这次针对的是交强险的‘无过错赔偿’条款。该律师不理解的是:明明是别人的汽车撞了他的汽车,而且他毫无过错,为什么还要承担赔偿责任。据说该活动得到很多车主的支持,这让交强险在经受了‘是否存在暴利’的质疑之后,再次被抛到了风口浪尖之上,5月下旬,保监会官员就交强险为何保费高而保障低、无过错赔付的法律依据等焦点问题作出了表态,认为律师的计算方法有误,高调为交强险辩护。
In recent days, compulsory insurance for motor vehicle accident liability (hereinafter referred to as ’compulsory insurance’) has been put in the whirlpool of controversy for less than a year. In late April, a lawyer in Beijing applied for administrative reconsideration to the China Insurance Regulatory Commission (hereinafter referred to as “CIRC”) for having considered paying tens of billions of dollars in violent profits. After being rejected, the lawyer simply filed a complaint The CIRC will be brought to court. Soon after the other lawyer experienced a traffic accident, he started to organize a nationwide power of attorney solicitation to solicit hearings, this time against the ’no-fault remedies’ clause of compulsory insurance. What the lawyer did not understand was that a car that apparently was someone else hit his car, and that he had no fault and why he still had to bear the liability for compensation. It is said that the activity was supported by many car owners. This made the compulsory insurance company once again be put on the cusp of being cautious after being subjected to the question of whether there is any profiteering. In late May, the officials of the CIRC insisted on why insurance should pay high premiums with low protection and no fault compensation The legal basis of the focus issues made a position, that the lawyer’s calculation method is wrong, a high profile to pay strong insurance defense.