英文摘要 |
From the perspective of general Consumer of Insurance Contract, whether it is general insurance products or investment-linked insurance products, the number of insurance solicitation documents is quite large, and the content and terms are also difficult to understand because they involve multiple professions. Due to the professionalism, complexity, partiality of information and high restriction on the freedom of contracting of insurance contracts, the proposer’s understanding and mastery of the contents of the insurance policy is largely dependent on the insurer’s explanation and disclosure of product information. If there is no comprehensive system to protect the proposer’s information rights at the institutional level, the proposer may not be able to understand the content of the insurance product he or she purchased, and it is extremely easy to generate financial consumer disputes in the future. For this reason, the International Association of Insurance Commissioners (IAIS) stipulates in point 19.7 of the Insurance core principle and methodology (ICP) that supervisors of each member state should require insurers and intermediaries to provide timely, clear and adequate pre-contractual and contractual information to customers. As far as the Taiwan’s current laws is concerned, the system used to protect the proposer’s information rights before and after the contract is signed includes the " Standard Contracts Reviewing Period" stipulated in Article 11 of the Consumer Protection Law, the "Duty of Explanation and Disclosure of the financial services providers " stipulated in Article 10 of the Financial Consumer Protection Law, the "absolute right of withdrawal for special transactions" stipulated in Article 19 of the Consumer Protection Law, and the "right of revoking insurance contract" that currently has no legal basis and is only regulated in the Standard Provisions The protection of laws and regulations seems to be very comprehensive. However, as far as the disclosure system is concerned, except for the the right to revoke insurance contract, other systems are not specially designed for insurance contract. How should these regulations be interpreted when they are applied to insurance contracts? If there are doubts or contradictions in interpretation, how should they be resolved? After each of these systems is applied to an insurance contract, if the effect of each of these systems in protecting the proposer’s right to information is quite limited, how should we find a good alternative? In addition, are there any deficiencies that need to be reviewed and improved in the operation of various systems in insurance practice? What’s more, the above-mentioned systems all have the function of adjusting information asymmetry, so when different systems with repeated functions are applied to an insurance contract, how should we explain it so that the needs of all parties can be met? If there is something unfinished on legal interpretation theory, how should the legislation be developed in the future? The researcher of this study will collect relevant academic papers and court judgments, and refer to the provisions of the German Insurance Contract Act on the protection of the proposer’s information rights to learn various disputes in depth, and respond to the aboved questions one by one. It is hoped that the research results of this thesis will help promote the protection of proposers’ information rights, reduce disputes in the market due to insurance solicitation, and promote the sound development of Taiwan’s insurance market. |