最高院于2018年7月31日发布了《关于适用<;若干问题的解释（四）》（“《解释（四）》”）。《解释（四）》将于2018年9月1日生效，其就保险标的的转让、保险合同双方当时人的权利和义务、代位追偿索赔和责任保险等相关问题提供了进一步指导意见。
全文共4804字，阅读预计需要10分钟。
作者 | 观韬中茂大连办公室 刘丹
责编 | 观韬中茂大连办公室 刘燕迪
供图 | 王宝珍
The Supreme People’s Court has issued the Interpretation IV on Several Issues concerning the Application of the Insurance Law on 31July 2018 (‘Interpretation IV’). The Interpretation IV will take effect on 1 September 2018. It gives further guidelines on the issues in respect of transfer of the subject matter insured, the rights and obligations of the parties to the insurance contract, the subrogated claims and liability insurance.
最高院于2018年7月31日发布了《关于适用<;若干问题的解释（四）》（“《解释（四）》”）。《解释（四）》将于2018年9月1日生效，其就保险标的的转让、保险合同双方当时人的权利和义务、代位追偿索赔和责任保险等相关问题提供了进一步指导意见。
This article will introduce the relevant provisions of the Interpretation IV and their impact on the insurer’s subrogated claims
本文将分析《解释（四）》中对保险人的代位追偿纠纷的部分规定和影响。
1. Jurisdiction
管辖
The Supreme People’s Court issued the Guiding Case No.25 ‘Jiangsu Branch of Ping An Property Insurance Company of China v. Jiangsu Zhenjiang Installation Group Co Ltd’ on 26 January 2014 and confirmed that in respect of the insurer’s subrogated claim, the jurisdiction shall be ascertained according to the legal relationship between the insured and the third party instead of the insurance contract.
最高院在2014年1月26日发布的第25号指导案例“华泰财产保险有限公司北京分公司诉李志贵、天安财产保险股份有限公司河北省分公司张家口支公司保险人代位求偿权纠纷案”，确认了保险人的代位诉讼应当根据被保险人与第三人之间的法律关系，。
Article12 of the Interpretation IV confirms the decision of the above Guiding Case that in respect of the insurer’s subrogated claim against the third party, the jurisdiction shall be ascertained on basis of the legal relationship between the insured and the third party. However, whether the agreed jurisdiction clause between the insured and the third party is binding on the insurer is still arguable and uncertain in judicial practices.
《解释（四）》第十二条确认了上述指导案例的判决，即对于保险人对第三人的代位追偿案件，管辖权应根据被保险人和第三人之间的法律关系确定。但被保险人和第三人之间约定的管辖权条款是否能约束保险人在司法实践中还有较大的争议和不确定性。
Accordingto the Civil Procedure Law, if the insured and the third party have contractual relationship, the Court at the place where the Defendant is domiciled or the Court at the place where the contract is performed shall have jurisdiction over the subrogated claim. The jurisdiction is different subject to the special type of the contract between the insured and the third party. If there is transportation relationship between the insured and the third party, the Court at the place of origin of transportation, or the Court at the place of destination of transportation, or the Court at the place where the Defendant is domiciled shall have jurisdiction.
根据《民事诉讼法》，如果被保险人和第三人存在合同法律关系，。特殊的合同法律关系，。如果被保险人和第三人之间存在运输合同法律关系，运输始发地、。
If the insured suffered losses due to the third party’s tortious act, the Court at the place where the tortious act is carried out or the Court at the place where the Defendant is domiciled shall have jurisdiction.
如果被保险人由于第三人的侵权行为遭受损失，。
2. Basis of the subrogated claim
代位追偿案件的基础
Article 60 of the Insurance Law provides that where an insured incident occurs due to any damage caused by a third party to the subject matter insured, the insurer shall, after it pays indemnity to the insured, be subrogated with the insured's right to claim for indemnity against the third party within the extent of the indemnity amount. In the previous judicial practices, it is arguable whether any damage caused by a third party to the subject matter insured also covers the circumstances under which damage is caused by the breach of contract of a third party.
《保险法》第六十条规定：“因第三者对保险标的的损害而造成保险事故的，保险人自向被保险人赔偿保险金之日起，在赔偿金额范围内代位行使被保险人对第三者请求赔偿的权利。”在过去的司法实践中，由于“第三者对保险标的的损害”是否也包括因第三人违约造成的损害是有争议的。
The Supreme People’s Court issued the Guiding Case No.74 ‘Jiangsu Branch of Ping An Property Insurance Company of China v. Jiangsu Zhenjiang Installation Group Co Ltd’ on 28 December 2016 and confirmed that any damage caused by the breach of contract of a third party also falls within “any damage caused by a third party to the subject matter insured” in paragraph 1 of Article 60 of the Insurance Law. The Court shall support the insurer’s exercising of the subrogation right against the third party in this regard.
最高院在2016年12月28日发布的第74号指导案例“中国平安财产保险股份有限公司江苏分公司诉江苏镇江安装集团有限公司保险人代位求偿权纠纷案”，确认了因第三人的违约行为给被保险人的保险标的造成损害的，可以认定为属于《保险法》第六十条第一款规定的第三人对保险标的的损害的情形。保险人由此依法向第三人行使代位求偿权的，。
Article 7 of the Interpretation IV also confirms the decision of the above Guiding Case that the Courts shall support the insurer’s subrogated claims against the third party on basis of either the latter’s tortious act or breach of contract.
《解释（四）》第七条也确认了上述指导案例中的判决，即保险人主张代位行使保险人因第三人侵权或者违约等享有的请求赔偿的权利的，。
3. The insured has waived or limited its right toclaim for compensation from the third party before the insurance contract is enteredinto
被保险人在保险合同成立前放弃或限制向第三人请求赔偿的权利
The insurer may only find that there is waiver clause or limitation of liability clause in the contract between the insured and the third party when the relevant documents are available after payment of the insurance indemnity is made to the insured. Or in the course of the insurer’s subrogated claim, the third party raises that the insured has waived or limited its right to claim against them.
在保险人在向被保险人赔付后取得相关文件时，保险人可能才发现被保险人和第三人的合同中存在弃权或责任限制条款。或者在保险人追偿过程中，第三人提出被保险人曾放弃或限制向其追偿的权利。
In the judicial practices, the Court usually considers that the insured’s waiver or limit of the right to claim against the third party is valid and effective.The insurer cannot file recourse claim against the third party or may only claim against the third party on basis of the limitation amount.
在司法实践中，，保险人不得向第三人追偿或只能依据责任限额向第三人追偿。
In respect of whether the insurer could deduct or request the insured to return the corresponding insurance indemnity due to the insured’s waiver or limitationof liability, the Courts may have different understandings and views.
但对于保险人是否能因被保险人的弃权或限制赔偿责任扣减或要求被保险人返还相应的保险金，。
Article 61 of the Insurance Law provides that
“Where, after an insured incident occurs and before the insurer pays the insurance indemnity, the insured waives the right to claim against the third party, the insurer shall not be liable to pay the insurance indemnity.
Where the insured waives the right to claim against the third party without the consent of the insurer after the insurer pays the insurance indemnity to the insured, the waiver shall be null and void.
Where the insurer is unable to exercise the right of subrogation due to the insured’s intention or gross negligence, the insurer may deduct or require the insured to refund the corresponding amount of insurance indemnity.”
《保险法》第六十一条规定：
“保险事故发生后，保险人未赔偿保险金之前，被保险人放弃对第三者请求赔偿的权利的，保险人不承担赔偿保险金的责任。
保险人向被保险人赔偿保险金后，被保险人未经保险人同意放弃对第三者请求赔偿的权利的，该行为无效。
被保险人故意或者因重大过失致使保险人不能行使代位请求赔偿权利的，保险人可以扣减或者要求返还相应的保险金。”
Some Courts consider that the provisions of the Paragraph 3 of Article 61 of the Insurance Law only apply at the stage after the insured incident occurs and before the insurance indemnity is paid by the insurer. While some Courts consider that the Paragraph 3 of Article 61 of the Insurance Law does not define the time when such provisions shall apply.
，保险人未赔偿保险金之前的阶段。。
In adispute arising from damage to cargo during road transportation, the insurer filed recourse claim against the carrier after making payment of the insurance indemnity to the insured. The contractual carrier alleged that they were entitled to enjoy the limitation of liability according to the transportation contract between them and the insured. The local Court in Jiangxi Province considered that the insured waived the right to claim for the actual losses incurred against the third party before the insurance contract was entered into. The insurer cannot request the third party to compensate the actual losses and could only ask for compensation subject to the amount of the limitation of liability. The Court further made reference to the Paragraph 3 of Article 61 of the Insurance Law and considered that the insurer suffered losses due to the insured’s waiver of its right to claim for the actual losses, the insurer could ask the insured to return the corresponding insurance indemnity.
在一起因道路运输事故造成货损事故的案件中，保险人在赔付被保险人后向合同承运方追偿，合同承运人主张其有权依据与被保险人之间的运输合同享受约定的责任限额。，因此保险人不能再向第三人要求赔偿实际损失，只能按照责任限额要求赔偿。，认为被保险人放弃要求第三人按实际损失赔偿的行为给保险人造成了损失，保险人可以要求被保险人返还相应的保险金。
The Court obviously did not consider the condition “the insured’s intention or gross negligence” in Paragraph 3 of Article 61. At the time when the insured entered into the transportation contract, the insured did not enter into the insurance contract for the cargoin question. It is difficult to affirm the insured’s intention or gross negligence. It is worth to consider whether the Court should apply the provisions.
显然，。在被保险人签订该运输合同时，被保险人并未购买涉案货物保险，因此，也很难认定被保险人当时就存在故意或重大过失。。
However, the waiver or limitation of liability clause would definitely affect the insurer’s subrogation right, whether the insured shall disclose such information at the time when the insurance contract is entered into?
但弃权或限制责任的约定确实会影响保险人的追偿权利，被保险人是否应当在订立保险合同时披露该信息呢？
The duty of disclosure in the Insurance Law is disclosure of the facts only enquired by the insurer. When the insurer enquiries about the relevant information, the insurance applicant shall truthfully disclosure the same. If not enquired, the insurance applicant is not obliged to disclose such information. In this connection, we understand that if the insurer does not enquire about the wavier or limitation of liability clause, the insured is not obliged to disclose such information.
《保险法》中规定的告知义务是询问告知义务，即保险人就有关情况提出询问的，投保人应当如实告知。没有询问的，投保人并没有义务告知。根据该条款，我们可以理解，就相关弃权条款，如果保险人没有询问，被保险人没有义务主动披露。
To resolve the above uncertainties, Article 9 of the Interpretation IV provides that:
“Where, in the subrogation lawsuit filed by the insurer against the third party as the Defendant, the third party makes defense on the ground that the insured has waived the right to claim the insurance indemnity against it before the insurance contract is concluded, the Court holds that the aforesaid waiver is lawful and valid, and the insurer claims the exercise of right of subrogation on the corresponding part, the Court shall not support such a claim.
Where the insurer enquires about the aforesaid waiver circumstances when the insurance contract is concluded, but the insurance applicant fails to truthfully inform the insurer, which leads to the insurer's failure to exercise the right of subrogation, if the insurer claims for refund of the corresponding insurance indemnity, the Court shall support such claim, unless the insurer knows or should have known the aforesaid circumstances and still agrees to underwrite the insurance”.
为了解决以上的不确定性，《解释（四）》第九条明确规定：
“在保险人以第三者为被告提起的代位求偿权之诉中，第三者以被保险人在保险合同订立前已放弃对其请求赔偿的权利为由进行抗辩，，保险人就相应部分主张行使代位求偿权的，。
保险合同订立时，保险人就是否存在上述放弃情形提出询问，投保人未如实告知，导致保险人不能代位行使请求赔偿的权利，保险人请求返还相应保险金的，，但保险人知道或者应当知道上述情形仍同意承保的除外。”
According to the above provisions, if the insured has already waived its right to claim against the third party before the insurance contract is entered into, such waiver is valid and effective. Whether the insurer could ask the insured to return the insurance indemnity would depend on whether the insurer has made enquiries about the waiver clause. If the insurer has already made such enquiries, but the insured failed to disclose the same truthfully, the insurer could ask for refund of the insurance indemnity. If the insurer did not make such enquiries, the insurer cannot ask for refund of the insurance indemnity in due course.
根据上述规定，如果被保险人在保险合同订立前已经放弃要求第三人赔偿的权利，该放弃行为合法有效。保险人是否能要求被保险返还保险金取决于在保险合同订立前保险人是否就放弃情形提出过询问。如果提出询问，但投保人未如实告知，则保险人才能要求返还保险金。如果保险人未就放弃情形提出询问，则保险人无权要求返还保险金。
It is suggested that the insurer shall make enquiries about whether the insurance applicant/insured has waived or limited the right to claim against the third party when the insurance contract is negotiated and entered into in future. This could avoid the circumstances that the insurer cannot recover their lossesin the recourse claim.
保险公司在今后保险合同协商阶段和签订时应注意向投保人/被保险人询问其是否已经放弃或限制向第三人追偿的权利，从而避免在保险追偿阶段因未询问而导致无法追回损失。
Whether the Interpretation IV would apply to the marine insurance?
上述《解释（四）》是否也适用海上保险？
In respect of marine insurance, Article 253 of the Chinese Maritime Code provides that where the insured waives its right to claim against the third party without the consent of the insurer or the insurer is unable to exercise the right of subrogation due to the insured’s fault, the insurer could deduct the corresponding amount of insurance indemnity.
《海商法》第二百五十三条规定被保险人未经保险人同意放弃向第三人要求赔偿的权利，或者由于过失致使保险人不能行使追偿权的，保险人可以相应扣减保险赔偿。
The Chinese Maritime Code has not ascertained the time when the insured waived the right to claim against the third party. Before the insurance contract is entered into, the insured is not able to seek insurer’s consent in this regard. The limitation of liability clause in the contract is very common clause in the commercial contract. It is difficultto say that the insured is negligent in entering into the contract with such clause before the insurance contract is entered into.
《海商法》并没有界定被保险人放弃向第三人要求赔偿的权利的时间点。显然在保险合同成立前，被保险人无法征求保险人的同意。同样，合同中约定的限制责任条款是商业合同常见条款，很难说明被保险人在保险合同成立前签署有该条款的合同存在过失。
The Chinese Maritime Code requires the insured to disclose all the material facts insured voluntarily. The insuredshall disclose all the material information before the insurance contract is entered into without enquiries from the insurer. There is conflict between the Interpretation IV and the duty of disclosure in the Chinese Maritime Code and it seems that it is not proper to apply such provisions of the Interpretation IV for the marine insurance at the moment.
《海商法》中规定的是无限告知义务。被保险人在海上保险合同订立前应主动告知相关的重要情况，而无需保险人询问。显然《解释（四）》这一条款与无限告知义务存在一定的冲突，似乎并不适合海上保险纠纷。
In view of the above, in respect of the marine insurance, the insured shall voluntarily disclose the waiver clause. Otherwise, the insurer may still been titled to ask the insured to return the insurance indemnity etc.
因此，对于海上保险，被保险人应主动告知关于弃权相关条款，否则保险人仍可能有权要求被保险人返还保险金。
作者简介：刘丹律师是观韬中茂律师事务所大连办公室的执业律师。刘丹律师擅长处理货物和船舶纠纷，保险代位追偿纠纷，以及海上保险、财产保险和责任保险等保单责任纠纷。刘丹律师也对处理空运、航运破产、集装箱租赁、国际贸易、合同等纠纷有着丰富的经验。刘丹律师为多家国际保险公司、航空公司、物流企业、船厂等提供法律服务。
联系方式：（Email: liud@guantao.com）
观韬中茂律师事务所
长按二维码关注
北京 · 上海 · 西安 · 成都 · 大连 · 深圳 · 济南
厦门 · 香港 · 天津 · 广州 · 杭州 · 悉尼 · 苏州
纽约 · 武汉 · 多伦多 · 南京 · 联营办公室*
*观韬中茂亚司特（上海自贸区）联营办公室
点击“阅读原文”链接到观韬中茂官方网站。