论文部分内容阅读
中国人民保险公司(PICC)海洋运输货物保险条款中的“一切险”条款,作为实践中使用最为广泛的保险条款,极大鼓励了我国海上货物运输的发展。但其在举证责任方面的模糊不清,与国际社会的普遍应用的英国伦敦保险协会制定的《协会货物保险(ICC)A条款》存在不一致之处,不利于我国海上货物运输保险与国际的接轨。因此,文章从“一切险”举证的定义、与ICC(A)责任的比较以及我国需要在举证责任方面的修改等方面对其进行了分析。
As the most widely used insurance clause in the PICC marine insurance clause, the “all risk” clause in marine cargo insurance greatly encourages the development of China’s maritime cargo transportation. However, its ambiguity in the burden of proof has inconsistencies with the “Articles of Association Insurance (ICC) A” stipulated by the London Insurance Association of the United Kingdom, which is universally applied by the international community, which is not conducive to the integration of China’s marine cargo insurance with international standards . Therefore, the article analyzes the definitions of the proof of “all risks”, the comparison with the responsibility of ICC (A) and the need for our country to amend the burden of proof.