A Study on Legal Dispute Arising from Investment-Linked Insurance--Based on Recent Court Decisions

• Main Authors: Li-Fu Lin, 林立夫
• Other Authors: 劉宗榮
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2010
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/00351963449733263025

碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 科際整合法律學研究所 === 98 === Wealth management or asset allocation is a hot topic in recent years. Besides banks and security companies, insurance companies also deliver financial service to consumers by insurance products. It showed that non-claim dispute cases grew much more in numbers than claim dispute cases in government statistics. We also found that there are many insurance legal dispute cases both in traditional life insurance and unit-linked insurance products. This thesis divided insurance dispute into four types:1.The policy holder had no idea of buying a life insurance product 2.The policy holder had no idea of buying an unit-linked insurance product 3.Guarantee dispute in protection of investment principal or rate of return 4.Service charge dispute in unit-linked insurance product. Based on recent court decisions, the thesis divided legal dispute into three types: 1.fraud 2. The salesman violated paragraph 2 of Article 184,civil code, a statutory provision enacted for the protection of others and therefore prejudice to others 3. The terms and conditions in standard contracts violated the principle of good faith and are conspicuously unfair to consumers. In the study we found that the policy holders suffered the burden of proof and it’s hard to persuade the court in fraud cases. Furthermore, the court still didn’t have same decisions when the policy holder argued that the salesman violated paragraph 2 of Article 184, civil code. About the solution, first, we suggest that legislators should apply the concept of “Suitability” and “Disclosure” to the regulation of conduct of insurance service. Second, in the Draft of Financial Service Act, we suggest that financial service companies violate the rules of “Suitability” will be a prima facie evidence for the damage of consumers in order to protect policy holders and therefore deliver better insurance service to consumers.