Dejstvo prorogacione klauzule u ugovorima o osiguranju velikih rizika – Odluka Suda pravde Evropske unije u predmetu Balta

Mirjana B. Glintić
{"title":"Dejstvo prorogacione klauzule u ugovorima o osiguranju velikih rizika – Odluka Suda pravde Evropske unije u predmetu Balta","authors":"Mirjana B. Glintić","doi":"10.55836/pip_23212a","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For the last couple of years ECJ`s point of view is that forum selection clause is not legally binding for the insured. Main reason for that is the need for protection of the weeker party. Тhis standpoint also found its place in the ECJ’s decision in Balta case, which concerned large risk insurance. Terefore the author devotes central part of the paper to the analysis of disputed aspects of this decision. Main shortcoming of the Court’s reasoning is the neglect of the fact that it is third-party insurance of large risks. The author points out two practical consequences of this decision. The frst is refected in the additional limitation of the autonomy of the will in contractual insurance law. Another consequence is an increase of premiums. To conclude with, the author shares the thoughts on „circumventing“ of this legally binding decision.","PeriodicalId":306662,"journal":{"name":"Pravo i privreda","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pravo i privreda","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55836/pip_23212a","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

For the last couple of years ECJ`s point of view is that forum selection clause is not legally binding for the insured. Main reason for that is the need for protection of the weeker party. Тhis standpoint also found its place in the ECJ’s decision in Balta case, which concerned large risk insurance. Terefore the author devotes central part of the paper to the analysis of disputed aspects of this decision. Main shortcoming of the Court’s reasoning is the neglect of the fact that it is third-party insurance of large risks. The author points out two practical consequences of this decision. The frst is refected in the additional limitation of the autonomy of the will in contractual insurance law. Another consequence is an increase of premiums. To conclude with, the author shares the thoughts on „circumventing“ of this legally binding decision.
大额风险保险合同中的中止条款事实--欧盟法院对 Balta 案的判决
在过去的几年里,欧洲法院的观点是,法庭选择条款对被保险人没有法律约束力。主要原因是需要保护周末派对。Тhis的观点也在欧洲法院对涉及大额风险保险的Balta案的判决中找到了一席之地。因此,作者将论文的中心部分用于分析这一判决的争议方面。本院论证的主要缺陷在于忽视了其为第三方大风险保险的事实。作者指出了这一决定的两个实际后果。前者体现在契约保险法对意志自治的附加限制上。另一个后果是保费的增加。最后,笔者就如何“规避”这一具有法律约束力的判决提出了一些看法。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信