Injured in a traffic accident, the claim for accident insurance and the perpetrator double compensation

【Legal Basis】Article 46 of the Insurance Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that if an insured person suffers an insured accident such as death, disability or illness due to the acts of a third party, the insurer shall not enjoy the right to recover from the third party after paying the insurance premium to the insured or beneficiary, but the insured or beneficiary still has the right to claim compensation from the third party.

【Basic Facts】On July 16, 2018, Wei Mou's driving truck collided with the car driven by Zhang Mou, resulting in a road traffic accident in which the passenger Liu was injured and the vehicle was damaged. After the accident, the traffic police made a traffic accident determination letter, determining that Wei was fully responsible for the traffic accident and Liu was not responsible. After identification, Liu Mou's mouth was limited to grade 10 disability, and the right eyeball was inverted up to grade 10 disability. The truck driven by Wei Mou was insured with compulsory traffic insurance, and the accident occurred during the insurance period. Wei believes that Liu has reimbursed the medical expenses from elsewhere, and Wei should not compensate for the medical expenses. (For details, see (2019) Jin 02 Min Zhong No. 1737)

【Court View】After the infringed party obtains the insurance premium for the personal insurance claim, it still enjoys the right to claim damages for infringement from the infringer. Since the insurance premium of life insurance is the amount of money paid by the insurer to the insured or beneficiary according to the provisions of the life insurance contract, and the civil compensation liability is the legal consequence that the infringer should bear for infringing on the civil rights of others, the two are neither overlapping nor contradictory. In addition, life insurance has both hedging and investment functions, from the perspective of who invests and who benefits, the infringer cannot reduce the liability for compensation because of the investment of the infringed. This court held that Liu's medical expenses fell within the scope of damages of the compensation obligor in accordance with the law, and Liu's reimbursement of medical expenses by an insurance institution outside the case was a matter handled between the relevant institution and Liu, and did not exempt or reduce the compensation liability of the compensation obligor in this case because Liu reimbursed the medical expenses elsewhere.

Disputes arise suddenly, and I am always a lawyer friend

Please pay attention to @Nanning Liao Hui lawyer