Partner Chen Won a ground-breaking Insurance Claim Case in Shandong Province

隆安成功代理保险合同纠纷案件:法院以人格混同为由驳回被保险人全部诉讼请求

Recently, the lawyer team of Long An Law Firm Shanghai Offices Chen, Huiping received the final judgment of an insurance contract dispute case involving a fire insurance incident. An intermediate people’s court in Shandong rejected all Cách nạp tiền 8xbetlaims of the insured on the grounds of “commingled legal personhoods”. Cách nạp tiền 8xbetase was successfully handled by Chen’s team, and Cách nạp tiền 8xbetlient spoke highly of it. According to the big data searching results, this is the first property insurance contract dispute case in China where Cách nạp tiền 8xbetourt dismissed all Cách nạp tiền 8xbetlaims of the insured on the grounds of “commingled legal personhoods”.

隆安成功代理保险合同纠纷案件:法院以人格混同为由驳回被保险人全部诉讼请求

This case can be called “twists and turns”. It has gone through four stages of arbitration, cancellation of arbitration, first instance and second instance, lasting nearly three years. Cách nạp tiền 8xbetase,which is complicated,involves many laws of multiple legal departments, such as insurance law, company law, marriage law, civil law, banking law, accounting law, criminal law, land management law, etc. In Cách nạp tiền 8xbetommercial arbitration stage of this case, Cách nạp tiền 8xbetlient (a property insurance company) and its original agent expected the arbitration result was unfavorable and helpless. Based on their confidence in Long An, they decided to switch counsel halfway in the battle and retained Chen, Huiping. After accepting Cách nạp tiền 8xbetommission, the lawyers of Long An Law Firm, with Cách nạp tiền 8xbetooperation of Cách nạp tiền 8xbetlient, went deep into the front line of Cách nạp tiền 8xbetase, traveled thousands of kilometers to many cities in Shandong, interviewed the relevant parties of Cách nạp tiền 8xbetase, applied to the relevant departments for the materials related to Cách nạp tiền 8xbetase, and finally formed evidence. A total of 29 pieces of evidence have been submitted to the arbitration tribunal, demonstrating the personality confusion between the insured and the lessee of the plant and machinery destroyed by the fire. However, the lawyers of Long An Law Firm have submitted sufficient evidence to prove that personality confusion between the insured and the lessee, the lessee has full of other insurance company for compensation, the losses have been filled, and should no longer get another insurance claim cases, the arbitration tribunal still ruled the insurer shall compensate the insured losses of more than 400 ten thousand yuan.

The lawyers of Long An Law Firm in the arbitration trial stage investigation evidence found that: before the fire, the insured has been for tax cancellation. In Cách nạp tiền 8xbetase that the lawyers cannot obtain the tax cancellation materials, therefore, the lawyers of Long An Law Firm applied to the arbitration tribunal for obtaining the above materials or for the arbitration tribunal to order the applicant to provide the above materials. However, the arbitral tribunal has neither invoked nor ordered the applicant to provide and has not yet replied to the respondent. Considering that the arbitration tribunal violated the arbitration rules, after the arbitration award of this case, the lawyers of Long An Law Firm advised Cách nạp tiền 8xbetlient to apply to the intermediate people’s court where the arbitration commission is located to revoke the arbitration award on the ground that the arbitration tribunal violated the arbitration rules. At the same time, the lawyers of Long An Law Firm submitted a legal opinion similar to a petition to Cách nạp tiền 8xbetourt. Based on the facts of Cách nạp tiền 8xbetase investigated by the lawyers, this opinion has made a layer upon layer of analysis and sorting and thinks that the arbitration award should be annulled in terms of sentiment, law and reason, no matter from the legal effect or social effect. After receiving Cách nạp tiền 8xbetlient’s application for cancellation of the arbitration award, the intermediate people’s court suspended the application for compulsory execution of the insured and carefully examined Cách nạp tiền 8xbetlient’s application for cancellation of the arbitration award. Finally, some of the opinions of the lawyers were adopted to confirm that the arbitration tribunal violated the arbitration rules, and the arbitration award should be revoked.

After Cách nạp tiền 8xbetourt quashed the arbitration award, the insured filed a lawsuit with the people’s court that has jurisdiction over Cách nạp tiền 8xbetase and demanded compensation from Cách nạp tiền 8xbetlient (that is, the insurer). However, after hearing, Cách nạp tiền 8xbetourt of first instance and Cách nạp tiền 8xbetourt of second instance all think that, the business scope of insurant and its tenant is similar, management personnel crosses, management address is identical, contact person is identical, finance does not have independence. It does constitute personality confusion. In Cách nạp tiền 8xbetase that the insurer has submitted preliminary evidence, the insured fails to provide corresponding evidence to prove the fact that the insurer and the lessee are indeed independent operators, the income and expenditure of the two parties are separate, and the economic exchanges between the two parties are completely independent, so Cách nạp tiền 8xbetonfusion of personality between them is highly probable. Based on this, the insured cannot repeatedly obtain the indemnity from the insurer in this case if the lessee has already obtained the indemnity. Therefore, the judgment of the first instance rejected all Cách nạp tiền 8xbetlaim of the insured, and the judgment of the second instance upheld it.

隆安成功代理保险合同纠纷案件:法院以人格混同为由驳回被保险人全部诉讼请求

隆安成功代理保险合同纠纷案件:法院以人格混同为由驳回被保险人全部诉讼请求

长按识别二维码更多精彩