01
Basic facts of the case
At 2:30 on October 17, 2022, the defendant Wang drove his Lu C××××× car (which is a commercial freight vehicle) and collided with the Lu C8 ×××× driven by the plaintiff Zhang, and the vehicle was damaged, causing a road traffic accident. The traffic police department determined that Wang was fully responsible for the accident. Zhang sued for compensation of 17,000 yuan for car damage and provided a maintenance statement to substantiate it. Defendant Wang argued that the accident was true and the insurance company should be responsible for compensation. The defendant, an insurance company, argued that the accident was true, the compulsory traffic insurance had been paid, and the defendant's employment certificate had expired at the time of the accident, so it was not liable for compensation within the limit of the commercial third-party insurance.
02
Heard by the courts
After trial, the court held that in this case, Article 24 of the "Motor Vehicle Comprehensive Commercial Insurance Clause" presented to the policyholder by an insurance company stipulates that: "Within the scope of the above-mentioned insurance liability, the insurer shall not be liable for compensation for personal injury, property damage and expenses caused by any cause under the following circumstances." The insurer is not responsible for compensation for the following personal injuries, property damages and expenses... 6. Driving a rental motor vehicle or commercial motor vehicle without a license or other necessary certificate issued by the transportation management department..."This clause has been blackened and bolded, and the insured has been stamped and confirmed by a transportation company in Zibo in the declaration column of the policyholder, so according to the provisions of Article 11, Paragraph 2 and Article 13 of the Interpretation (II) of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Insurance Law of the People's Republic of China, an insurance company has fulfilled its obligation to prompt and explain this clause. Wang did not provide evidence to prove that he drove the commercial motor vehicle involved in the case and had a road cargo transportation qualification certificate issued by the transportation management department, and Wang's road passenger transportation qualification certificate (employment certificate) provided by an insurance company is a license for passenger transportation, not a cargo transportation license, and expires on May 26, 2021, so according to the relevant laws and regulations, the above-mentioned liability exemption clauses for property losses have legal effect, and the vehicle losses caused by the accident involved in the case should be borne by the tortfeasor. Wang recognized that he was the owner and driver of the Lu C××××× vehicle involved in the case, so it should be determined that Wang was the tort responsible person for the accident involved in the case and should bear the liability for compensation to Zhang in accordance with the law. Therefore, the defendant Wang was ordered to compensate the plaintiff Zhang for the loss of the vehicle in the amount of 17,000 yuan.
03
What the judge said
The core issue involved in this case is whether the insurance company should be liable for compensation within the scope of commercial third-party insurance if the driver involved in a traffic accident while driving the relevant vehicle without obtaining the operating freight vehicle employment certificate (i.e., the road cargo transport qualification certificate).
In judicial practice, it is not uncommon for the driver to drive a vehicle without obtaining a license for the operation of a freight vehicle and get involved in a traffic accident. There is a view that whether the driver has a work permit does not affect his qualification to drive the vehicle, nor can it significantly increase the probability of a motor vehicle traffic accident and increase the risk of the insurance company's claims, and the insurance company only requires exemption based on the fact that the driver has not obtained the work permit, which is obviously unfair, so the driver who caused the accident does not have the relevant qualification certificate, which cannot be a reason for the insurance company to exempt him from the liability for commercial third-party insurance. There is also a view that the driver who caused the accident did not obtain the employment certificate of the operating freight vehicle, which violated the provisions of the motor vehicle third-party liability insurance contract, so the insurance company should be exempted from liability within the limit of the commercial third-party insurance. In this case, the court held that the insurance company should be exempted from liability within the limit of the commercial third-party insurance according to the contract, so it ruled that the insurance company should be exempted from liability within the limit of the commercial third-party insurance. In this regard, the author believes that the court's determination is correct, and the main reasons are as follows:
1. The agreement on the exemption clause in the commercial third-party insurance contract is not invalid and is a valid clause
According to the provisions of the second paragraph of Article 6 of the Regulations on the Administration of Road Transport Employees: "Qualification is the basic evaluation of the professional quality of the specific positions engaged in by road transport employees. That is, obtaining the qualification certificate is the basic professional qualification for the driver to engage in commercial road transport, and it is the basic guarantee for road transport safety. Article 24 stipulates: "Drivers of commercial road passenger and freight transport, road transport of dangerous goods practitioners after passing the examination, obtain the People's Republic of China road transport practitioners qualification certificate. "In this case, in the motor vehicle third-party liability insurance contract signed between an insurance company and an insurance company in Zibo, the insurance company clearly stated the exemption clause to the policyholder in prominent black font, and the policyholder had sealed and confirmed that it knew the exemption clause, and the exemption clause did not have any invalid circumstances such as malicious collusion to damage the legitimate rights and interests of others, violation of public order and good customs, or violation of mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations, as stipulated by law, and was a valid clause.
2. The exemption clause stipulated in the motor vehicle third-party liability insurance contract is an exclusion clause and does not completely exempt the insurance company from its insurance liability and contractual obligations
Generally speaking, there are three types of exclusion clauses in insurance contracts, namely exclusion of circumstances, exclusion of causes, and exclusion of losses and expenses. In this case, the exemption clause of "driving a rental motor vehicle or a commercial motor vehicle without a license or other necessary certificate issued by the transportation management department" is an exclusionary category, that is, as long as the listed circumstances are met, the insurance company will not be liable for compensation for the losses and expenses caused by any cause, and does not emphasize whether there is a causal relationship between the cause of exemption and the result of the accident. Due to the uncertainty and contingency of the occurrence of the insured event, the insurance contract is a lucky contract, that is, the occurrence of the danger underwritten by the insurer or the conditions for the payment of insurance benefits agreed in the insurance contract is uncertain. If the driver drives a motor vehicle in a traffic accident without a license issued by the transportation management department or other necessary certificates, the insurance company is not responsible for the exemption clause, as a contract rule of the shooting contract, does not completely exempt the insurance company from the insurance liability and contractual obligations, as long as the insurance company has fulfilled the obligation to prompt and explain the exemption clause, the insurance company can not be liable for compensation according to the contract when the circumstances agreed in the exemption clause occur.
3. If the driver has not obtained the employment certificate of the commercial freight vehicle and has a traffic accident while driving the vehicle involved in the case, the insurance company shall be exempted from liability if it meets the provisions of the motor vehicle third-party liability insurance contract on the exemption circumstances
Article 22 of the Road Transport Regulations of the People's Republic of China stipulates: "Drivers engaged in freight business shall meet the following conditions: (1) obtain the corresponding motor vehicle driving license; (2) Not more than 60 years old; (C) by the municipal road transport management agency divided into districts on the relevant freight laws and regulations, motor vehicle maintenance and cargo loading and storage of basic knowledge of the examination (except for the use of a total mass of 4,500 kg and below ordinary freight vehicle drivers). The third paragraph of Article 6 of the Regulations on the Administration of Road Transport Employees stipulates: "Drivers of commercial road passenger and freight transport and road transport of dangerous goods must obtain the corresponding qualifications before they can engage in the corresponding road transport activities. "According to the principle of voluntariness of contract, the content of the contract shall be voluntarily agreed upon by the parties without violating the provisions of the law, and the motor vehicle third-party liability insurance contract shall be voluntarily concluded by the parties, and its amount, scope and exemptions shall be agreed upon by the parties. In this case, if an insurance company and the insured, a transportation company in Zibo, agreed in the motor vehicle third-party liability insurance contract that "driving a rental motor vehicle or a commercial motor vehicle without a license or other necessary certificate issued by the transportation management department", the insurer shall not be liable for compensation. In this case, the driver who caused the accident, Wang, did not obtain a work permit for the operation of the freight vehicle, and a traffic accident occurred while driving the vehicle involved in the case, which violated the provisions of the motor vehicle third-party liability insurance contract, so the defendant's insurance company's claim that it should be exempted from liability within the limit of the commercial third-party insurance has a legal basis and should be supported in accordance with the law.
04
Relevant Laws
Article 1208 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China Where a motor vehicle is involved in a traffic accident and causes damage, it shall be liable for compensation in accordance with the Road Traffic Safety Law and the relevant provisions of this Law.
Article 1213 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China Where damage is caused by a traffic accident involving a motor vehicle and the liability of the motor vehicle party is the responsibility of the motor vehicle, the insurer underwriting the compulsory insurance of the motor vehicle shall first compensate within the limit of the liability of the compulsory insurance; For the shortfall part, the insurer underwriting the commercial insurance of motor vehicles shall compensate in accordance with the provisions of the insurance contract; If it is still insufficient or has not taken out commercial insurance for motor vehicles, the infringer shall compensate for it.
Article 76 of the Road Traffic Safety Law of the People's Republic of China Where a traffic accident involving a motor vehicle causes personal injury or death or property damage, the insurance company shall compensate within the limits of the compulsory third-party liability insurance liability of the motor vehicle; The insufficient part shall be liable for compensation in accordance with the following provisions: (1) In the event of a traffic accident between motor vehicles, the party at fault shall bear the liability for compensation; Where both parties are at fault, responsibility is to be shared in proportion to their respective faults. (2) In the event of a traffic accident between a motor vehicle and a non-motor vehicle driver or pedestrian, and the non-motor vehicle driver or pedestrian is not at fault, the motor vehicle shall be liable for compensation; If there is evidence to prove that the driver or pedestrian of the non-motor vehicle is at fault, the liability of the motor vehicle party shall be appropriately reduced according to the degree of fault; If the motor vehicle party is not at fault, it shall bear no more than 10% of the liability for compensation.
If the loss of a traffic accident is caused by a non-motor vehicle driver or pedestrian intentionally colliding with a motor vehicle, the motor vehicle party shall not be liable for compensation.
Article 17 of the Insurance Law of the People's Republic of China Where an insurance contract is concluded and the standard clauses provided by the insurer are adopted, the insurance policy provided by the insurer to the policyholder shall be accompanied by standard clauses, and the insurer shall explain the contents of the contract to the policyholder.
For the clause exempting the insurer from liability in the insurance contract, the insurer shall, at the time of conclusion of the contract, make a reminder sufficient to attract the attention of the policyholder on the insurance policy, insurance policy or other insurance certificate, and make a clear explanation to the policyholder in written or oral form of the content of the clause; If there is no reminder or clear explanation, the clause shall not be effective.
Article 11 of the Interpretation (II) of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Insurance Contract When an insurance contract <中华人民共和国保险法>is concluded, if the insurer reminds the clause in the insurance contract exempting the insurer from liability in the insurance contract with words, fonts, symbols or other conspicuous signs sufficient to attract the attention of the policyholder, the people's court shall find that it has fulfilled the obligation to prompt as provided for in paragraph 2 of Article 17 of the Insurance Law.
Where the insurer makes an explanation to the policyholder in written or oral form of the concept, content and legal consequences of the clause exempting the insurer from liability in the insurance contract that can be understood by ordinary people, the people's court shall find that the insurer has fulfilled its obligation to make a clear explanation as provided for in paragraph 2 of Article 17 of the Insurance Law.
Case prepared by: Liu Xiaohui
![If a traffic accident victim has an old injury, will it affect the amount of compensation? Court: It is not necessary to submit evidence to prove a connection[fig]]()