The condition under which the insurer has the right to terminate the insurance contract by his own willingness according to the Jordanian legislation : its meaning and legitimacy

Ahmad Abu Samhadaneh, Ameen Al-Rafai'e
{"title":"The condition under which the insurer has the right to terminate the insurance contract by his own willingness according to the Jordanian legislation : its meaning and legitimacy","authors":"Ahmad Abu Samhadaneh, Ameen Al-Rafai'e","doi":"10.35682/jjlps.v14i4.373","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aimed at identifying the meaning of the condition under which the insurer maintains the right of terminating the contract by his own willingness and the legitimacy of this condition. The study highlighted the definition of this condition, its objective, characteristics and legal adaptation, where the results revealed that this condition is included by most insurance companies in the insurance document and implies granting the insurer the right to terminate the contract by his own willingness before the legal restricted time without violating the rights of the insured.\nThe most important problem that the study aimed to identify in this vein lies in the extent of legitimacy of this condition, where the results revealed that the condition is valid according to the general rules and considered as an application for the voluntary condition for termination. However, the same condition was found to be arbitrary in the legal rules pertaining consumption contract as being more specified rules according to article (22), section (4) of the law of the Jordanian consumer protection No. 7 of 2017, which implies granting the supplier the right to terminate the contract by his own willingness. Therefore, the court, based on its discretion authority, can cancel this condition, modify it or exempt the insured from it. As for the legal rules governing the insurance contractas more specified umbrella, it was an arbitrary condition that has a special judgment which is cancellation when violating it does not have an impact on the event – the judge's provision is considered as exploring one, but not a stating, where the judge has no discretion authority in this vein.\nAccordingly, we are left within duality in dealing with this condition legally. Such a duality has been criticized; therefore, we hoped that the Jordanian legislator would eliminate this duality by subjecting all the arbitrary conditions in insurance to the judge's discretion authority in modifying the condition or exempting the insured from it as in the case of the act of protecting the Jordanian consumer, since it achieves justice better than the report of canceling the condition which could be a basic one and may entail cancelling the contract, where this contradicts the intention of protecting the disadvantaged party in the contract.","PeriodicalId":270369,"journal":{"name":"Jordanian Journal of Law and Political Science","volume":"97 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jordanian Journal of Law and Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35682/jjlps.v14i4.373","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study aimed at identifying the meaning of the condition under which the insurer maintains the right of terminating the contract by his own willingness and the legitimacy of this condition. The study highlighted the definition of this condition, its objective, characteristics and legal adaptation, where the results revealed that this condition is included by most insurance companies in the insurance document and implies granting the insurer the right to terminate the contract by his own willingness before the legal restricted time without violating the rights of the insured. The most important problem that the study aimed to identify in this vein lies in the extent of legitimacy of this condition, where the results revealed that the condition is valid according to the general rules and considered as an application for the voluntary condition for termination. However, the same condition was found to be arbitrary in the legal rules pertaining consumption contract as being more specified rules according to article (22), section (4) of the law of the Jordanian consumer protection No. 7 of 2017, which implies granting the supplier the right to terminate the contract by his own willingness. Therefore, the court, based on its discretion authority, can cancel this condition, modify it or exempt the insured from it. As for the legal rules governing the insurance contractas more specified umbrella, it was an arbitrary condition that has a special judgment which is cancellation when violating it does not have an impact on the event – the judge's provision is considered as exploring one, but not a stating, where the judge has no discretion authority in this vein. Accordingly, we are left within duality in dealing with this condition legally. Such a duality has been criticized; therefore, we hoped that the Jordanian legislator would eliminate this duality by subjecting all the arbitrary conditions in insurance to the judge's discretion authority in modifying the condition or exempting the insured from it as in the case of the act of protecting the Jordanian consumer, since it achieves justice better than the report of canceling the condition which could be a basic one and may entail cancelling the contract, where this contradicts the intention of protecting the disadvantaged party in the contract.
根据约旦法律保险人有权自愿终止保险合同的条件:其含义和合法性
本研究旨在厘清保险人维持其自愿解除合同权利的条件的含义,以及这一条件的合法性。本研究重点分析了该条件的定义、目的、特点和法律适应性,研究结果表明,该条件被大多数保险公司纳入保险单据中,意味着保险人在法定限定时间内,在不侵犯被保险人权利的情况下,有权自行解除合同。在这方面,本研究旨在确定的最重要问题在于这一条件的合法性程度,其结果显示,根据一般规则,这一条件是有效的,并被视为自愿终止条件的一种申请。然而,根据约旦2017年第7号消费者保护法第(22)条第(4)款,在有关消费合同的法律规则中,同样的条件被认为是任意的,因为这是更具体的规则,这意味着授予供应商自愿终止合同的权利。因此,法院可以根据其自由裁量权取消、修改或免除被保险人的这一条件。对于更具体的保险合同保护伞的法律规定,它是一种具有特殊判决的任意条件,即违反该规定即取消对事件没有影响,法官的规定被认为是探索性的,而不是陈述性的,法官在这方面没有自由裁量权。因此,在法律上处理这一情况时,我们是在二元对立的范围内。这种二元性受到了批评;因此,我们希望约旦立法者能够消除这种两重性,将保险中的所有任意条件置于法官在修改条件或豁免被保险人时的自由裁量权之下,就像保护约旦消费者的行为一样,因为它比取消可能是基本条件并可能导致取消合同的条件的报告更好地实现正义。与保护合同中处于不利地位一方的意图相抵触的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信