海上貨物保險與安裝工程保險之保險競合問題探討──最高法院94年度台上字第379號判決評析

A STUDY ON OTHER INSURANCE BETWEEN MARINE CARGO AND ERECTION ALL RISKS INSURANCE – DISCUSS OF SUPREME COURT VERDICT NO.379 IN 2005

進口機器設備於投保時將考量不同的危險性質而投保不同的保險，如於海上及內陸運輸途中投保貨物運輸保險，於工廠安裝試車時投保安裝工程保險，在連續的保險過程中將可能產生不同保險契約間保險期間的銜接空窗或競合的問題。本文探討不同保險契約間保險期間之規定，及評析最高法院94年台上字第379號之判決。

Imported machinery consider different risk and insure different insurance while insuring, marine transit would be insure marine cargo insurance, and insure erection all risks insurance when installation take a trial run in the factory, connecting the gap and claim problem during may produce the insurance among different insurance policy in the continuous insurance coursing. This study discuss period of insurance with different insurance clauses and analysis the Supreme Court Verdict NO.379 in 2005.