Insurance subrogation dispute case 1
January 15, 2009, the policyholder in Guangzhou City, Haizhu District, Feng Yang Hengfa textile fabrics on the value of 300,000 yuan of buildings and warehousing valued at 7 million yuan is located in Guangzhou City, Haizhu District, Kang Le Xiyao new area of storage to the plaintiff, February 2, 2009, the plaintiff to the policyholder issued the policy of property all risks insurance policy, the insurance period since February 3, 2009 00:00 to February 2, 2010 24:00.
On February 9, 2009, the policyholder found that the subject matter of the insurance located in Guangzhou City, Haizhu District, Kang Le West about the second floor of the new district of the second horizontal lane No. 23, the water leaked from the third floor of the drenching, in order to reduce the loss of water in order to remove the water at the same time to the plaintiff reported to the scene, requesting a survey and claim. The Plaintiff sent officers to investigate the scene on February 10, 2009, and after approving the relevant losses, paid the insurance claim of RMB 254,246.13 Yuan to the first indemnified person, Cai Xiaoming, on April 28, 2009, according to the agreement of the insurance contract. The policyholder's insurance subject matter of the loss is caused by the third floor leakage, and the third floor of the house owner is the defendant, so the plaintiff sued for: 1, the defendant to pay the principal amount of insurance compensation 254,246.13 yuan, and in accordance with the people's bank of china stipulated by the interest rate of the same period of time loan interest rate from april 29, 2009 to the date of the actual liquidation of the interest to the plaintiff; 2, the case of the litigation costs borne by the defendant.
Insurance subrogation dispute case 2
In March 2012, a Shanghai textile company commissioned a freight forwarding company in Shanghai to import a batch of cotton, the batch of cotton by an insurance company Shanghai branch of the transportation and storage insurance. After the goods arrived at the Shanghai port, the freight forwarding company is responsible for arranging the storage of goods in a bonded warehouse in Shanghai, early August of the same year, the bonded warehouse company due to rent arrears and leave the field. Warehouse owner Shanghai A warehousing company took over the warehouse, and the original blockade of the warehouse door pry open, arranged for B elevator company to repair the elevator in the warehouse, B elevator company in the construction process of illegal welding led to a fire in the warehouse, the warehouse of cotton was burned.
An insurance company to make a claim to the court after the lawsuit, requiring the A storage company, B elevator company for all the goods loss of tort liability. Company A defends that it is not the custodian of the goods, should not be liable for compensation. B elevator company on the amount of fixed loss of defense.
The court held that the insurer in the exercise of the right of subrogation, can choose to be insured with the third party contractual relationship to the contractual counterparty to claim the rights, but also can choose to be based on the tort relationship directly to the tortfeasor to claim the rights. The amount of loss of goods should be combined with the trade contract, customs declaration and transportation documents. B elevator company illegal welding behavior constitutes infringement, should bear the tort liability, a storage company in the fire actually in charge of the goods, the loss of goods in 30% of the proportion of joint and several liability with the company.
Insurance subrogation dispute case 3
June 1, 2011, Huatai Property Insurance Company Limited, Beijing Branch (referred to as Huatai Insurance Company) and Beijing Yada Jindu Catering Management Company Limited (referred to as Yada Jindu Catering Company) signed a contract of motor vehicle insurance, the insured vehicle's license plate number for the Beijing A82368, the period of insurance from June 2011 to 2012, the insurance period. The insurance period started from 0:00 on June 5, 2011 and ended at 24:00 on June 4, 2012. On November 18, 2011, Chen Moumou drove the insured vehicle to the Airport Expressway in Chaoyang District, Beijing, and ___Gui drove the vehicle with the license plate number of Hebei GA9120 in a traffic accident, causing damage to the insured vehicle. The traffic control department determined that __Gui was fully responsible for the accident. After the accident, Huatai Insurance Company compensated the insured, Yaday Jindu Catering Company, for the insurance premium of RMB 83,878 in accordance with the insurance contract, and obtained the right of subrogation in accordance with the law. Based on the accident vehicle in Tianan Property Insurance Company Limited Hebei Branch Zhangjiakou Branch (referred to as Tianan Insurance Company) insured motor vehicle traffic accident liability insurance, Huatai Insurance Company in October 2012 to Beijing Dongcheng District People's Court, requesting that the defendant driver ___ Gui and Tianan Insurance Company to compensate for the 83,878 yuan, and bear the costs of the litigation.
The defendant __ Gui's place of residence is Shacheng Town, Huailai County, Zhangjiakou City, Hebei Province, and the defendant Tian'an Insurance Company's place of residence is No. 108, East Yenjing Road, Shacheng Town, Huailai County, Zhangjiakou City, the place of occurrence of the insurance accident is on the Airport Expressway in Beijing's Chaoyang District, and the owner's address recorded in the traveling certificate of the insured vehicle is No. 8, Xinzhongxi Street, Gongtibei Road, Dongcheng District, Beijing.
Insurance subrogation dispute case 4
Ms. Chen in June 2004 for five consecutive years from the purchase of a Shanghai insurance company's vehicle collision insurance (insurance amount of 250,000 yuan) and its personal injury accident liability insurance and a series of additional insurance in March 2008, Ms. Chen driving a Mercedes-Benz car at high speed due to speeding will be a cross highway man A hit and died. The traffic department determined that Ms. Chen was secondarily responsible, i.e., she was responsible for 30% of the damages. After the insurance company to determine the damage, Ms. Chen cumulative damage to the car and spent 150,000 yuan repair costs, at the same time, because Ms. Chen also purchased personal injury accident liability insurance, the insurance company needs to compensate for the death of the a **** total of 1. 20,000 yuan.
Ms. Chen believes that, according to the relevant provisions of the insurance law and the insurance contract signed with the insurance company, the insurance company should pay the loss of 150,000 yuan to the insured first, while the insurance company enjoys the right of subrogation, you can then ask for compensation to the family of the A. The insurance company's opinion: according to the insurance claim, the insurance company should pay the loss of 150,000 yuan to the insured first. Insurance company's opinion: according to the principle of "compensation according to the responsibility", the insurance company only needs to compensate Ms. Chen for the loss of the car within the scope of 30%, in this case, the third party caused the accident when crossing the road, and eventually died, no longer have the ability to compensate. Therefore, the remaining 70% of the loss by the insured himself to the third party A request.
Related searches for insurance subrogation dispute cases:
1. 10 best typical cases
2. car insurance case analysis
3. maritime cargo transportation cases
4. or adjudication or trial provisions of the legal effect of what
5. 2016 the latest civil case case stipulation