海上责任保险中第三人直接请求权制度研究
|
摘要
本文以民法基本原理为指导,以现行海上强制责任保险中的第三人直接请求权制度为借鉴,参照国内外保险法律制度中的第三人直接请求权的相关规定,对海上责任保险中第三人直接请求权制度的一些基本问题,如海上责任保险中第三人直接请求权制度的研究价值、理论基础、行使条件以及第三人行使权利所遭遇的抗辩作了初步研究,并提出立法建议。全文除了引言和结论共分4章。
第1章对第三人直接请求权进行概述。介绍了海上责任保险中第三人直接请求权的含义、研究价值以及第三人取得直接请求权的理论基础。从民事责任理论、保险法理论和破产原理三方面阐述了海上责任保险中第三人直接请求权制度设立的合理性;从保护受害第三人合法权益、维护保险人的利益和被保险人的合法权利三个角度分析了海上责任保险中第三人直接请求权制度的可行性。
第2章介绍了国内外关于第三人直接请求权的立法现状。本章列举了国际公约、英美法系以及大陆法系的国家和地区有关第三人直接请求权的规定,并且说明了我国海事诉讼特别程序法和海商法中对于第三人直接请求权规定的不足与缺失。
第3章介绍了海上强制责任保险中的第三人直接请求权制度。概括介绍了目前国际上对于强制责任保险中第三人直接请求权的相关规定、行使的条件和第三人行使直接请求权所遭遇的抗辩。
第4章对在海上任意责任保险中建立第三人请求权制度进行研究,此章是本文的重点。由于强制责任保险与任意责任保险本质上的不同,因此本章以权利转移说为依据,重点阐述了在海上任意责任保险中第三人行使直接请求权的条件、所遭受的抗辩。同时,分析了在海上任意责任保险中设立第三人直接请求权制度对现行法律制度产生的影响。
最后,提出立法建议。根据本文的论述,结合我国法律现状,提出在我国《海商法》中以法律直接规定的形式,明确在法定条件下第三人的直接请求权,赋予第三人更加完善的保护。
Based on the basic tenets of the Civil Law as a guide, borrowing ideas from the direct claim to the third party system in the existing maritime compulsory liability insurance, combined with the specific conditions in China, the thesis gives a preliminary study on some fundamental problems of the third party's direct claim system in maritime liability insurance, such as the research value of the system, the theoretical foundation, enforcing conditions as well as the defense of the third party suffered and put forward legislative proposals. In addition to the introduction and the conclusion, the thesis is divided into four chapters.
The first chapter gives an overview on the direct claim to the third party. It introduces the definition of the third-person direct claim system in marine liability insurance, the research value and the theoretical basis. From the three perspectives of civil liability theory, the theory of insurance and bankruptcy, the thesis illustrates the rationality of the third-person direct claim system in the sea liability insurance and its feasibility from -the three perspectives of protecting the legitimate rights and interests of victims, safeguarding the interests of the insurer and the insured's legal rights. The thesis sheds light on the school of the direct request of the creditors the right of subrogation, the school of the responsibility for payment from that transfer of power and the school of the original made a statement.
The second chapter describes the legislative status quo of the direct claim to the third party at home and abroad. This chapter lays out the third-person direct claim system in International Conventions, Common Law and the related regulations of Civil Law Countries and Regions, and points out the flaws of the third party direct claim system in the proceedings of the special procedures of the Marine Act and the Maritime Law.
The third chapter describes the third-person direct claim system in the maritime compulsory liability insurance. It gives an overview of the current relevant provisions of the third-person direct request system in international compulsory liability insurance and enforcing conditions as well as the defense of the third person suffered.
The fourth chapter is the key part of the thesis and studies the establishment of third-party direct claim system in the arbitrary liability insurance. Owing to differences on nature of the compulsory liability insurance and liability insurance arbitrary, the chapter focuses on the right to transfer the liability insurance in the third arbitrary exercise of the right to directly claim the conditions suffered by the defenses. At the same time, in the any liability insurance in the establishment of a third request directly to the existing system of the impact of the legal system.
At last, propose legislative advice. According to this paper, discussed in light of China's current legal status quo, in China by the "CMC" provisions of the law directly in the form of clear statutory conditions in the direct claim to give the third person better protection.
第1章对第三人直接请求权进行概述。介绍了海上责任保险中第三人直接请求权的含义、研究价值以及第三人取得直接请求权的理论基础。从民事责任理论、保险法理论和破产原理三方面阐述了海上责任保险中第三人直接请求权制度设立的合理性;从保护受害第三人合法权益、维护保险人的利益和被保险人的合法权利三个角度分析了海上责任保险中第三人直接请求权制度的可行性。
第2章介绍了国内外关于第三人直接请求权的立法现状。本章列举了国际公约、英美法系以及大陆法系的国家和地区有关第三人直接请求权的规定,并且说明了我国海事诉讼特别程序法和海商法中对于第三人直接请求权规定的不足与缺失。
第3章介绍了海上强制责任保险中的第三人直接请求权制度。概括介绍了目前国际上对于强制责任保险中第三人直接请求权的相关规定、行使的条件和第三人行使直接请求权所遭遇的抗辩。
第4章对在海上任意责任保险中建立第三人请求权制度进行研究,此章是本文的重点。由于强制责任保险与任意责任保险本质上的不同,因此本章以权利转移说为依据,重点阐述了在海上任意责任保险中第三人行使直接请求权的条件、所遭受的抗辩。同时,分析了在海上任意责任保险中设立第三人直接请求权制度对现行法律制度产生的影响。
最后,提出立法建议。根据本文的论述,结合我国法律现状,提出在我国《海商法》中以法律直接规定的形式,明确在法定条件下第三人的直接请求权,赋予第三人更加完善的保护。
Based on the basic tenets of the Civil Law as a guide, borrowing ideas from the direct claim to the third party system in the existing maritime compulsory liability insurance, combined with the specific conditions in China, the thesis gives a preliminary study on some fundamental problems of the third party's direct claim system in maritime liability insurance, such as the research value of the system, the theoretical foundation, enforcing conditions as well as the defense of the third party suffered and put forward legislative proposals. In addition to the introduction and the conclusion, the thesis is divided into four chapters.
The first chapter gives an overview on the direct claim to the third party. It introduces the definition of the third-person direct claim system in marine liability insurance, the research value and the theoretical basis. From the three perspectives of civil liability theory, the theory of insurance and bankruptcy, the thesis illustrates the rationality of the third-person direct claim system in the sea liability insurance and its feasibility from -the three perspectives of protecting the legitimate rights and interests of victims, safeguarding the interests of the insurer and the insured's legal rights. The thesis sheds light on the school of the direct request of the creditors the right of subrogation, the school of the responsibility for payment from that transfer of power and the school of the original made a statement.
The second chapter describes the legislative status quo of the direct claim to the third party at home and abroad. This chapter lays out the third-person direct claim system in International Conventions, Common Law and the related regulations of Civil Law Countries and Regions, and points out the flaws of the third party direct claim system in the proceedings of the special procedures of the Marine Act and the Maritime Law.
The third chapter describes the third-person direct claim system in the maritime compulsory liability insurance. It gives an overview of the current relevant provisions of the third-person direct request system in international compulsory liability insurance and enforcing conditions as well as the defense of the third person suffered.
The fourth chapter is the key part of the thesis and studies the establishment of third-party direct claim system in the arbitrary liability insurance. Owing to differences on nature of the compulsory liability insurance and liability insurance arbitrary, the chapter focuses on the right to transfer the liability insurance in the third arbitrary exercise of the right to directly claim the conditions suffered by the defenses. At the same time, in the any liability insurance in the establishment of a third request directly to the existing system of the impact of the legal system.
At last, propose legislative advice. According to this paper, discussed in light of China's current legal status quo, in China by the "CMC" provisions of the law directly in the form of clear statutory conditions in the direct claim to give the third person better protection.
引文
[1]张卫平.程序公正实现中的冲突于平衡.四川:成都出版社,1992,107.
[2][日]谷口安平.程序的正义与诉讼.王主新,刘荣军译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1996,69.
[3][德]卡尔·拉伦茨.德国民法通论.王晓哗,邵建东,程建英等译.北京:法律出版社,2003,321.
[4]张智勇,许绯.论海上保险中第三人对保险人的诉权.天津航海.1998,4:31-34.
[5]崔建远,韩世远.合同法中的债权人代位权制度.中国法学.1999,3:33-36.
[6]马炎秋.论第三人对责任保险人的直接诉讼权.中国海洋大学学报(社会科学版).2005,1:49.
[7]李薇.日本机动车事故损害赔偿法律制度研究.北京:法律出版社,1992,246.
[8]陈萍萍.油污责任保险人与油污责任人责任形式研究--兼谈油污损害赔偿的立法完善.海商法研究.2004,10:54
[9]邹海林.责任保险论。北京:法律出版社,1999,246.
[10]李薇.日本机动车事故损害赔偿法律制度研究.北京:法律出版社,1992,245.
[11]王青,苏赞.合同相对性规则极其例外制度.江苏警官学院学报.2004,5:16.
[12]蓝承烈、翟羽艳、王春梅.保险法要论.哈尔滨:黑龙江人民出版社,1999,82-84.
[13]李可.海上责任保险及其发展趋势:(硕士学位论文).上海:上海海事大学,2005.
[14]Third parties(rights against insurers)Act(1.6)
[15]Cox v.Bank side Members Agency Ltd.劳式法律报告.1995.2:437.
[16]Merchant Shipping Act 1995(s165):(1)Where it is alleged that the owner of the ship has incurred a liability under section 153as a result of any discharge or escape of oil occurring,or of the result of any relevant of threat of contamination arising while there was a in force a contract of insurance or other security which such a certificate as is mentioned section 163 related,proceedingsto enforce a claim in respect of the liability may be brought against the person who provided the insurance or other security.
[17]Aasma v.American Steamship Owners Mutual Protection & Indemnity Association 95E3d 400 1997 AMC 1(6thcir.1996),该案中,第六巡回法院肯定了,船东互保协会援引的pay-to-be-paid条款的效力,驳回了人身损害赔偿的原告对互保协会的直接请求权。
[18]Wilburn Boat Co.v.Fireman's Fund Insurance Co.,348US310,1995AMC 467(1995),该案中,美国最高法院推翻了第五巡回法院的判决,要求地区法院依适当州的法律审理,却未说明详细原因,由于此后50年最高法院没有再聆讯过海上保险的案件,使得该案成为海上保险方面的权威判例,直接导致了法律适用的混乱。
[19]邹海林.责任保险论.北京:法律出版社,1999,223.
[20]香港政府1995年第(C)112号法律公告.香港政府宪报.1995,11-24.
[21]初北平.在我国对保赔协会的直接诉讼.中国海商法年刊.2003,13:226.
[22]梁贤宇.保险法实例解说.北京:人民大学出版社,1999.
[23]李薇.日本机动车事故损害赔偿法律制度研究.北京:法律出版社,1992,246.
[24]司玉琢.海商法专题研究.大连:大连海事大学出版社,2002.
[25]彭万林.民法学.北京:中国政法入学出版社,1997,584.
[26]初北平.海上强制责任保险研究.中国海商法年刊.2005,1:108.
[27]王利明.侵权行为法归责原则研究.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1999,41.
[28]邹海林.责任保险论.北京:法律出版社,1999,49.
[29]马炎秋.论第三人对责任保险人的直接诉讼权.中国海洋大学学报(社会科学版).2005,1:52.
[30]邹海林.责任保险论.北京:法律出版社.1999,209-211.
[31]闫伟.海上强制保险法律制度研究:硕士学位论文.大连:大连海事大学,2005.
[32]李凤宁.责任保险第三人直接请求权的性质探析.湖北社会科学.2007,7:142-144.
[33]史尚宽.债法总论.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2000,724.
[34]卢克贞.交通事故受害人对保险公司的请求权辨析.河南金融管理干部学院学报.2007,3:116.
[35]李希平.船舶保险与船舶保赔保险索赔和理赔若干问题之比较.集装箱化.2003,5:28.
[36]初北平.在我国对保赔协会的直接诉讼.中国海商法年刊.2003,13:228-229.
[37]http://www.ccmt.org.cn[hs/explore/exploreDetial.php?sId=378.
[38]该案中,两艘船舶相撞后,应对此次碰撞负责的船舶按照海事法院的命令被出卖,出卖收益被支付给受害船舶的船东,以执行其被判给的损害赔偿并被认为是被保险人在机构碰撞条款下应该支付的数额,尽管其并没有按照该规定实际支付。
[39]http://www.ccmt.org.cn/hs/explore/exploreDetial.php?sId=378.
[40]王桂香.保赔保险和海上承运人息息相关.集装箱化.2006,8:29.
[1]张卫平.程序公正实现中的冲突于平衡.四川:成都出版社,1992.
[2]梁贤宇.保险法实例解说.北京:人民大学出版社,1999.
[3]邹海林.责任保险论.北京:法律出版社,1999.
[4]王利明.侵权行为法归责原则研究.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1999.
[5]李薇.日本机动车事故损害赔偿法律制度研究.北京:法律出版社,1992.
[6]史尚宽.债法总论.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2000.
[7]陈安.国际海事法.北京:北京大学出版社,1995.
[8]张湘兰.海商法论.武汉:武汉大学出版社,2000.
[9]司玉琢.海商法专题研究.大连:大连海事大学出版社,2002.
[10]彭万林.民法学.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1997.
[11]司玉琢.海商法学案例教程.北京:知识产权出版社,2003.
[12]汪鹏南.海上保险合同法详论.大连:大连海事大学出版社,2003.
[13]郑功成.责任保险理论与经营实务.北京:中国金融出版社,1991.
[14]魏润泉,陈欣.海上保险的法律与实务.北京:中国金融出版社,2001.
[15]李玉泉.保险法.北京:法律出版社,1997.
[16]杨立新.侵权法热点问题法律应用.北京:人民法院出版社,2000.
[17]翟云岭,郭洁.新合同法论.大连:大连海事大学出版社,2000.
[18]张文显.法理学.北京:高等教育出版社,北京大学出版社,2004.
[19]杨良宜,汪鹏南.英国海上保险条款详论.大连:大连海事大学出版社,1996.
[20]樊启荣.责任保险与索赔理赔.北京:人民法院出版社,2002.
[21]张智勇,许绯.论海上保险中第三人对保险人的诉权.天津航海。1998,4:31-34.
[22]陈萍萍.油污责任保险人与油污责任人责任形式研究--兼谈油污损害赔偿的立法完善.海商法研究.2004,10:54.
[23]蓝承烈、翟羽艳、王春梅.保险法要论。哈尔滨:黑龙江人民出版社,1999,82-84.
[24]初北平.在我国对保赔协会的直接诉讼.中国海商法年刊.2003,13:222-232.
[25]马炎秋.论第三人对责任保险人的直接诉讼权.中国海洋大学学报(社会科学版).2005,1:48-52.
[26]李凤宁.责任保险第三人直接请求权的性质探析.湖北社会科学.2007,7:142-144.
[27]李希平.船舶保险与船舶保赔保险索赔和理赔若干问题之比较.集装箱化.2003,5:27-29.
[28]王桂香.保赔保险和海上承运人息息相关.集装箱化.2006,8:27-29.
[29]崔建远,韩世远.合同法中的债权人代位权制度.中国法学.1999,3:33-36.
[30]初北平.海上强制责任保险研究.中国海商法年刊.2005,1:95-111.
[31]王青,苏赞.合同相对性规则极其例外制度.江苏警官学院学报.2004,5:16.
[32]傅廷中,谷浩.海上保险立法的国际协调:基础、现状和障碍.中国海商法年刊.2006,1:129-142.
[33]周金龙.债务人破产时如何向保证人追索债权.现代金融.2005,1:45.
[34]丁孜山.国际保险发展研究.保险职业学院学报.2006,4:7-10.
[35]张立.破产法实施中债权人利益的保护.青岛师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版).2002,4:48-51.
[36]张振文.邹议司法确认之债权转让.山东审判.2006,5:102-104.
[37]邱至乔.略论债权转让.广东经济管理学院学报.2005,4:76-80.
[38]虞嵘.保险人的契约责任.法律经纬.2006,81:86-87.
[39]董占军.论合同的相对性.内蒙古财经学院学报.2003,8:57-59.
[40]申黎,尹志军.试论引进“附保护第三人作用之契约”理论的必要性.当代法学.2003.4:59-63.
[41]潘玉君.机动车责任保险第三人对保险公司的直接求偿权.法治论从.2006,7:114-121.
[42]谢瑾.从比较法的角度看合同相对性原则.新乡师范高等专科学校学报.2004,5:18-21.
[43]吴剑平,张悦.论互有过失船舶碰撞致船员、旅客人身伤亡的赔偿责任.世界海运.2005,8:42-44.
[44]胡卫国.违约责任与侵权责任竞合研究.法制与经济.2006,4:23-24.
[45]刘敢生,闫小龙.道路交通事故受害人的直接请求权.法治论从.2007,5:40-44.
[46]卢克贞.交通事故受害人对保险公司的请求权辨析.河南金融管理干部学院学报.2007,3:115-117.
[47]任雁冰.中国海上责任保险法律分析:硕士学位论文.上海:上海海事大学,2004.
[48]闫伟.海上强制保险法律制度研究:硕士学位论文.大连:大连海事大学,2005.
[49]尹静.请求权冲突研究:硕士学位论文.郑州:郑州大学,2004.
[50]杨卫东.第三人导致的债务人责任研究:硕士学位论文.重庆:西南政法大学,2002.
[51]于静.海上强制责任保险制度研究:硕士学位论文.上海:上海海事大学,2006.
[52]高晓燕.第三人利益合同效力基础研究:硕士学位论文.北京:中国政法大学,2006.
[53]李可.海上责任保险及其发展趋势:硕士学位论文.上海:上海海事大学,2005.
[54]初巧明.第三人对船舶责任保险人的直接请求权:硕士学位论文.大连:大连海事大学,2004.
[55]卞飞.论责任保险第三人的直接请求权:硕士学位论文.厦门:厦门大学,2001.
[56]安丰明.船东保赔协会法律制度研究--以英国法为中心:博士学位论文.重庆:西南政法大学,2004.
[57][英]科林·史密斯.责任保险.陈彩芬译.北京:中国金融出版社,1991.
[58][美]所罗门·许布纳,小肯尼斯·布莱克,伯纳德·韦布.财产和责任保险.北京:人民大学出版社,2002.
[59][德]卡尔·拉伦茨.德国民法通论.王晓晔,邵建东,程建英等译.北京:法律出版社,2003.
[60][日]谷口安平.程序的正义与诉讼.王主新,刘荣军译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1996.
[61]Malcola A.Clarks.The Law of Insurance Contracts.London:LLP,2000.
[62]B.A.Hepple,M.H.Matthews.Torts,Cases and Materials.London:Butterworths,1980.
[63]Harry Street.The Law of Torts.London:Butterworths,1983.
[64]E.R.Hardy Ivamy.Marine Insurance.London:Butterworths,1979.
[65]ChristoPher Hill..MarineLaw.London:LLP,2000.
[66]M.Clarke.Contracts of Insurance.London:LLP,1992.
[67]Merriam-Webster.Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law.Merriam-Webster:2007.
[68]Sioban Healy.Ship Arrests and The New- Civil Procedure Rules.Britannia News.2000,9:29.
[69]Chao Wu.Liability and Compensation for Bunker Pollution.Journal of Maritime Law&Commerce.2002,10.
[70]Dong-Oh Cho.The effects of the M/V Sea-Prince,accident on maritime Safety management in Korea,Marine Policy.2007,11:730-735.
[71]Hernando Rojas,-Dhavan V.Shah,Ronald J.Faber.For The Good of Others:Censorship and The Third-Person Effect.Oxford Journals.1996,Vol.8,NO.2:163-186.
[72]Unsworth,Edwin.IMO Considers Mandatory Liabflity Insurance Treaty.Business Insurance.1997,5.
[73]http://www.imo.org.
[74]http://averageadjusting.net/documents/docright21.html.
[75]http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/dfat/treaties/1985/16.html.
[76]http://www.oceanlaw.org.
[77]http://www.qzr.cn/newsfile/bxfl/bxflgw/20080222093247.shtml.
[78]http://www.insurance.ca.gov.
[79]http://www.jus.uio.no/lm/transport.and.carriage.of.goods/sea.html.
[80]http://www.law-walker.net/detail.asp?id=3471.
[81]Anerican Maritime Cases.
[82]Lloyd' s Law Reports.
[2][日]谷口安平.程序的正义与诉讼.王主新,刘荣军译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1996,69.
[3][德]卡尔·拉伦茨.德国民法通论.王晓哗,邵建东,程建英等译.北京:法律出版社,2003,321.
[4]张智勇,许绯.论海上保险中第三人对保险人的诉权.天津航海.1998,4:31-34.
[5]崔建远,韩世远.合同法中的债权人代位权制度.中国法学.1999,3:33-36.
[6]马炎秋.论第三人对责任保险人的直接诉讼权.中国海洋大学学报(社会科学版).2005,1:49.
[7]李薇.日本机动车事故损害赔偿法律制度研究.北京:法律出版社,1992,246.
[8]陈萍萍.油污责任保险人与油污责任人责任形式研究--兼谈油污损害赔偿的立法完善.海商法研究.2004,10:54
[9]邹海林.责任保险论。北京:法律出版社,1999,246.
[10]李薇.日本机动车事故损害赔偿法律制度研究.北京:法律出版社,1992,245.
[11]王青,苏赞.合同相对性规则极其例外制度.江苏警官学院学报.2004,5:16.
[12]蓝承烈、翟羽艳、王春梅.保险法要论.哈尔滨:黑龙江人民出版社,1999,82-84.
[13]李可.海上责任保险及其发展趋势:(硕士学位论文).上海:上海海事大学,2005.
[14]Third parties(rights against insurers)Act(1.6)
[15]Cox v.Bank side Members Agency Ltd.劳式法律报告.1995.2:437.
[16]Merchant Shipping Act 1995(s165):(1)Where it is alleged that the owner of the ship has incurred a liability under section 153as a result of any discharge or escape of oil occurring,or of the result of any relevant of threat of contamination arising while there was a in force a contract of insurance or other security which such a certificate as is mentioned section 163 related,proceedingsto enforce a claim in respect of the liability may be brought against the person who provided the insurance or other security.
[17]Aasma v.American Steamship Owners Mutual Protection & Indemnity Association 95E3d 400 1997 AMC 1(6thcir.1996),该案中,第六巡回法院肯定了,船东互保协会援引的pay-to-be-paid条款的效力,驳回了人身损害赔偿的原告对互保协会的直接请求权。
[18]Wilburn Boat Co.v.Fireman's Fund Insurance Co.,348US310,1995AMC 467(1995),该案中,美国最高法院推翻了第五巡回法院的判决,要求地区法院依适当州的法律审理,却未说明详细原因,由于此后50年最高法院没有再聆讯过海上保险的案件,使得该案成为海上保险方面的权威判例,直接导致了法律适用的混乱。
[19]邹海林.责任保险论.北京:法律出版社,1999,223.
[20]香港政府1995年第(C)112号法律公告.香港政府宪报.1995,11-24.
[21]初北平.在我国对保赔协会的直接诉讼.中国海商法年刊.2003,13:226.
[22]梁贤宇.保险法实例解说.北京:人民大学出版社,1999.
[23]李薇.日本机动车事故损害赔偿法律制度研究.北京:法律出版社,1992,246.
[24]司玉琢.海商法专题研究.大连:大连海事大学出版社,2002.
[25]彭万林.民法学.北京:中国政法入学出版社,1997,584.
[26]初北平.海上强制责任保险研究.中国海商法年刊.2005,1:108.
[27]王利明.侵权行为法归责原则研究.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1999,41.
[28]邹海林.责任保险论.北京:法律出版社,1999,49.
[29]马炎秋.论第三人对责任保险人的直接诉讼权.中国海洋大学学报(社会科学版).2005,1:52.
[30]邹海林.责任保险论.北京:法律出版社.1999,209-211.
[31]闫伟.海上强制保险法律制度研究:硕士学位论文.大连:大连海事大学,2005.
[32]李凤宁.责任保险第三人直接请求权的性质探析.湖北社会科学.2007,7:142-144.
[33]史尚宽.债法总论.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2000,724.
[34]卢克贞.交通事故受害人对保险公司的请求权辨析.河南金融管理干部学院学报.2007,3:116.
[35]李希平.船舶保险与船舶保赔保险索赔和理赔若干问题之比较.集装箱化.2003,5:28.
[36]初北平.在我国对保赔协会的直接诉讼.中国海商法年刊.2003,13:228-229.
[37]http://www.ccmt.org.cn[hs/explore/exploreDetial.php?sId=378.
[38]该案中,两艘船舶相撞后,应对此次碰撞负责的船舶按照海事法院的命令被出卖,出卖收益被支付给受害船舶的船东,以执行其被判给的损害赔偿并被认为是被保险人在机构碰撞条款下应该支付的数额,尽管其并没有按照该规定实际支付。
[39]http://www.ccmt.org.cn/hs/explore/exploreDetial.php?sId=378.
[40]王桂香.保赔保险和海上承运人息息相关.集装箱化.2006,8:29.
[1]张卫平.程序公正实现中的冲突于平衡.四川:成都出版社,1992.
[2]梁贤宇.保险法实例解说.北京:人民大学出版社,1999.
[3]邹海林.责任保险论.北京:法律出版社,1999.
[4]王利明.侵权行为法归责原则研究.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1999.
[5]李薇.日本机动车事故损害赔偿法律制度研究.北京:法律出版社,1992.
[6]史尚宽.债法总论.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2000.
[7]陈安.国际海事法.北京:北京大学出版社,1995.
[8]张湘兰.海商法论.武汉:武汉大学出版社,2000.
[9]司玉琢.海商法专题研究.大连:大连海事大学出版社,2002.
[10]彭万林.民法学.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1997.
[11]司玉琢.海商法学案例教程.北京:知识产权出版社,2003.
[12]汪鹏南.海上保险合同法详论.大连:大连海事大学出版社,2003.
[13]郑功成.责任保险理论与经营实务.北京:中国金融出版社,1991.
[14]魏润泉,陈欣.海上保险的法律与实务.北京:中国金融出版社,2001.
[15]李玉泉.保险法.北京:法律出版社,1997.
[16]杨立新.侵权法热点问题法律应用.北京:人民法院出版社,2000.
[17]翟云岭,郭洁.新合同法论.大连:大连海事大学出版社,2000.
[18]张文显.法理学.北京:高等教育出版社,北京大学出版社,2004.
[19]杨良宜,汪鹏南.英国海上保险条款详论.大连:大连海事大学出版社,1996.
[20]樊启荣.责任保险与索赔理赔.北京:人民法院出版社,2002.
[21]张智勇,许绯.论海上保险中第三人对保险人的诉权.天津航海。1998,4:31-34.
[22]陈萍萍.油污责任保险人与油污责任人责任形式研究--兼谈油污损害赔偿的立法完善.海商法研究.2004,10:54.
[23]蓝承烈、翟羽艳、王春梅.保险法要论。哈尔滨:黑龙江人民出版社,1999,82-84.
[24]初北平.在我国对保赔协会的直接诉讼.中国海商法年刊.2003,13:222-232.
[25]马炎秋.论第三人对责任保险人的直接诉讼权.中国海洋大学学报(社会科学版).2005,1:48-52.
[26]李凤宁.责任保险第三人直接请求权的性质探析.湖北社会科学.2007,7:142-144.
[27]李希平.船舶保险与船舶保赔保险索赔和理赔若干问题之比较.集装箱化.2003,5:27-29.
[28]王桂香.保赔保险和海上承运人息息相关.集装箱化.2006,8:27-29.
[29]崔建远,韩世远.合同法中的债权人代位权制度.中国法学.1999,3:33-36.
[30]初北平.海上强制责任保险研究.中国海商法年刊.2005,1:95-111.
[31]王青,苏赞.合同相对性规则极其例外制度.江苏警官学院学报.2004,5:16.
[32]傅廷中,谷浩.海上保险立法的国际协调:基础、现状和障碍.中国海商法年刊.2006,1:129-142.
[33]周金龙.债务人破产时如何向保证人追索债权.现代金融.2005,1:45.
[34]丁孜山.国际保险发展研究.保险职业学院学报.2006,4:7-10.
[35]张立.破产法实施中债权人利益的保护.青岛师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版).2002,4:48-51.
[36]张振文.邹议司法确认之债权转让.山东审判.2006,5:102-104.
[37]邱至乔.略论债权转让.广东经济管理学院学报.2005,4:76-80.
[38]虞嵘.保险人的契约责任.法律经纬.2006,81:86-87.
[39]董占军.论合同的相对性.内蒙古财经学院学报.2003,8:57-59.
[40]申黎,尹志军.试论引进“附保护第三人作用之契约”理论的必要性.当代法学.2003.4:59-63.
[41]潘玉君.机动车责任保险第三人对保险公司的直接求偿权.法治论从.2006,7:114-121.
[42]谢瑾.从比较法的角度看合同相对性原则.新乡师范高等专科学校学报.2004,5:18-21.
[43]吴剑平,张悦.论互有过失船舶碰撞致船员、旅客人身伤亡的赔偿责任.世界海运.2005,8:42-44.
[44]胡卫国.违约责任与侵权责任竞合研究.法制与经济.2006,4:23-24.
[45]刘敢生,闫小龙.道路交通事故受害人的直接请求权.法治论从.2007,5:40-44.
[46]卢克贞.交通事故受害人对保险公司的请求权辨析.河南金融管理干部学院学报.2007,3:115-117.
[47]任雁冰.中国海上责任保险法律分析:硕士学位论文.上海:上海海事大学,2004.
[48]闫伟.海上强制保险法律制度研究:硕士学位论文.大连:大连海事大学,2005.
[49]尹静.请求权冲突研究:硕士学位论文.郑州:郑州大学,2004.
[50]杨卫东.第三人导致的债务人责任研究:硕士学位论文.重庆:西南政法大学,2002.
[51]于静.海上强制责任保险制度研究:硕士学位论文.上海:上海海事大学,2006.
[52]高晓燕.第三人利益合同效力基础研究:硕士学位论文.北京:中国政法大学,2006.
[53]李可.海上责任保险及其发展趋势:硕士学位论文.上海:上海海事大学,2005.
[54]初巧明.第三人对船舶责任保险人的直接请求权:硕士学位论文.大连:大连海事大学,2004.
[55]卞飞.论责任保险第三人的直接请求权:硕士学位论文.厦门:厦门大学,2001.
[56]安丰明.船东保赔协会法律制度研究--以英国法为中心:博士学位论文.重庆:西南政法大学,2004.
[57][英]科林·史密斯.责任保险.陈彩芬译.北京:中国金融出版社,1991.
[58][美]所罗门·许布纳,小肯尼斯·布莱克,伯纳德·韦布.财产和责任保险.北京:人民大学出版社,2002.
[59][德]卡尔·拉伦茨.德国民法通论.王晓晔,邵建东,程建英等译.北京:法律出版社,2003.
[60][日]谷口安平.程序的正义与诉讼.王主新,刘荣军译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1996.
[61]Malcola A.Clarks.The Law of Insurance Contracts.London:LLP,2000.
[62]B.A.Hepple,M.H.Matthews.Torts,Cases and Materials.London:Butterworths,1980.
[63]Harry Street.The Law of Torts.London:Butterworths,1983.
[64]E.R.Hardy Ivamy.Marine Insurance.London:Butterworths,1979.
[65]ChristoPher Hill..MarineLaw.London:LLP,2000.
[66]M.Clarke.Contracts of Insurance.London:LLP,1992.
[67]Merriam-Webster.Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law.Merriam-Webster:2007.
[68]Sioban Healy.Ship Arrests and The New- Civil Procedure Rules.Britannia News.2000,9:29.
[69]Chao Wu.Liability and Compensation for Bunker Pollution.Journal of Maritime Law&Commerce.2002,10.
[70]Dong-Oh Cho.The effects of the M/V Sea-Prince,accident on maritime Safety management in Korea,Marine Policy.2007,11:730-735.
[71]Hernando Rojas,-Dhavan V.Shah,Ronald J.Faber.For The Good of Others:Censorship and The Third-Person Effect.Oxford Journals.1996,Vol.8,NO.2:163-186.
[72]Unsworth,Edwin.IMO Considers Mandatory Liabflity Insurance Treaty.Business Insurance.1997,5.
[73]http://www.imo.org.
[74]http://averageadjusting.net/documents/docright21.html.
[75]http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/dfat/treaties/1985/16.html.
[76]http://www.oceanlaw.org.
[77]http://www.qzr.cn/newsfile/bxfl/bxflgw/20080222093247.shtml.
[78]http://www.insurance.ca.gov.
[79]http://www.jus.uio.no/lm/transport.and.carriage.of.goods/sea.html.
[80]http://www.law-walker.net/detail.asp?id=3471.
[81]Anerican Maritime Cases.
[82]Lloyd' s Law Reports.