论文部分内容阅读
通过特别法赋予受害人直接请求权为多数国家之立法通例。如英国《道路交通法》第149条、日本《自动车损害赔偿保障法》第16条第1款、德国《汽车保有人强制责任保险法》第3条第1款。其宗旨都是为了切实的保护被害人。但是,日本的最高裁判所将其解释为直接请求权是行使损害赔偿请求权的辅助手段,从依存于损害赔偿请求权的成立以及存在的立场出发,推导出损害赔偿请求权消灭,直接请求权也消灭的结论,那么最高裁判所的判决有轻视《保险法》保护被害人的目的之嫌。
The legislation that gives victims direct claims under the lex specialis is a general rule of law in most countries. Such as the British “Road Traffic Law” Article 149, Japan “Auto Damage Compensation Law” Article 16, paragraph 1, the German “Car Owners Compulsory Liability Insurance Law,” Article 3, paragraph 1. Its purpose is to effectively protect the victims. However, Japan’s supreme court interprets it as a direct right of claim as an adjunct to exercise the right to claim damages, and deduces that the right to claim damages is eliminated from the establishment of the right to claim damages and the existence of the direct claim right Elimination of the conclusion, then the Supreme Court’s verdict contempt of the “Insurance Law” to protect the victims of the suspicion.