保护当事人合理期待是合同法隐含的基本原则,但20世纪70年代以来,美国法院开始将之作为解释保险合同时普遍适用的方法,据此否定合同中对承保范围的明确规定,重构合同权利义务。将这一作为兜底性条款的抽象法律原则事实上转化为优先适用的具体法律规则。这种做法既未能消减不公平条款,也有悖于保险营业的技术特性,因而不值采行。但另一方面,保险作为公共物品的属性和保险市场固有的结构性利益失衡表明,仍有必要实现合理期待从具体解释规则向如给付均衡一般的抽象矫正原则回归。这也可弥补基于给付均衡原则的司法审查不及于核心给付条款的局限。 However, since the 1970s, the U.S. courts began to use it as a universal method to explain the insurance contract, thus denying the express stipulations in the contract about the scope of coverage and reshaping the contract Rights and obligations. This abstract legal principle, which is a taciturn clause, is in fact translated into specific legal rules of priority. This practice neither undercut unfair clauses nor do they violate the technical characteristics of insurance operations. On the other hand, however, the imbalance between the attributes of insurance as a public good and the inherent structural interests of the insurance market suggests that there is still a need to make reasonable expectations return from specific rules of interpretation to the abstract rectification principle of a balanced payment. This can also make up for the judicial review based on the principle of balance of payment is less than the limitation of the core payment clause.