scholarly journals Subrogation in the Rear-View: Evaluating Alberta's Current Approach to Automobile Liability Insurance for Impaired Drivers

2014 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 601
Author(s):  
Kendal Gummer

In Alberta, automobile insurers are required to indemnify an insured up to policy limits for injury or property damage to third parties for which the insured is liable. Prior to 1 June 1982, insurers could demand reimbursement for third party liability payments if the insured driver caused loss while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. However, the Insurance Amendment Act removed the right of insurers to recover these sums. This article evaluates this amendment by considering its impact on the public policy objectives ordinarily associated with subrogation, and argues that, compared to the previous approach, Alberta’s current system of third party liability coverage better serves the objectives of subrogation.

Author(s):  
Michael P. Devereux ◽  
Alan J. Auerbach ◽  
Michael Keen ◽  
Paul Oosterhuis ◽  
Wolfgang Schön ◽  
...  

This chapter sets out our first detailed reform proposal: the Residual Profit Allocation by Income (RPAI). This is one of a family of schemes based on separating multinational profit into ‘routine’ and ‘residual’ profit, a distinction that exists under the current system. The RPAI allocates the right to tax routine profit to the country where functions and activities take place. It allocates the right to tax residual profit to the market, or destination, country where sales are made to third parties. We evaluate the RPAI against our five criteria. We conclude that while it is far from perfect, it performs well against these criteria. Its superior performance stems primarily from allocating taxing rights for residual profit to the destination country, where there is a relatively immobile third party purchaser of goods and services sold by the company.


2018 ◽  
pp. 101
Author(s):  
Rafael Lara González

ResumenPese a su ubicuidad en la práctica contractual, las cláusulas de franquicia han recibido tratamiento incidental en la doctrina. La discusión sobre ellas se ha enfocado en los contratos de seguros de responsabilidad civil, y en la interpretación del artículo 76 de la Ley española de Contrato de Seguro. En este contexto se ha tratado de establecer si el asegurador puede o no oponer la cláusula de franquicia al tercero perjudicado. El presente trabajo analiza la cláusula de franquicia en la obligación principal del asegurador, su naturaleza jurídica, y examina su relación con los terceros perjudicados. La consideración principal a este respecto estará en si nos encontramos ante un seguro obligatorio o ante un seguro voluntario de responsabilidad civil. Palabras clave: Contrato de seguro; Cláusula de franquicia; Terceroperjudicado; Responsabilidad civil.AbstractDespite their ubiquity in contractual praxis, deductible clauses have received only incidental treatment in legal doctrine. Discussion on them has focused on civil liability insurance contracts, and the interpretation of article 76 of the Spanish Law of Insurance Contracts. In this context it has been attempted to establish whether the insurer can invoke the clause to oppose the injured third party's claim. This article examines the deductible clause included in the insurer's main obligation, its legal nature, and its relation to injured third parties. The main consideration in this regard will be whether the insurance contract is of a mandatory or voluntary nature.Keywords: Insurance contract; Deductible clause; Injured third party; Civil liability.


Author(s):  
Ly Tayseng

This chapter gives an overview of the law on contract formation and third party beneficiaries in Cambodia. Much of the discussion is tentative since the new Cambodian Civil Code only entered into force from 21 December 2011 and there is little case law and academic writing fleshing out its provisions. The Code owes much to the Japanese Civil Code of 1898 and, like the latter, does not have a requirement of consideration and seldom imposes formal requirements but there are a few statutory exceptions from the principle of freedom from form. For a binding contract, the agreement of the parties is required and the offer must be made with the intention to create a legally binding obligation and becomes effective once it reaches the offeree. The new Code explicitly provides that the parties to the contract may agree to confer a right arising under the contract upon a third party. This right accrues directly from their agreement; it is not required that the third party declare its intention to accept the right.


2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elfrida R Gultom

The objective of Busway development is to provide transportation services faster, safer, comfortable, and affordable for people in Jakarta. Ticket prices are subsidized by the local government busway. Busway given special line, however could not be separated from the accident. In a carriage, in the event of an accident then apply provisions of Law No. 22 of 2009 on Traffic and Transportation. If there is a loss that hit the third party then setting responsibilities Public Service Agency TransJakarta Busway to third parties refer to the provisions of Article 194 paragraph (1) which determines that the public transport companies are not responsible for any losses suffered by third parties, unless the third party may prove that the loss is caused by the fault of public transport company. Under these provisions, if the third party wants to sue for damages, ketigalah party must prove the fault of the carrier, the claim is based on the basis of tort or on the basis of error set forth in Article 1365 of the Civil Code which stipulates that any action unlawfully harming others, require the person who carries the loss offset. Keywords: transport, the responsibility of the carrier, a third party, transport law


2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (336) ◽  
pp. 7-22
Author(s):  
Anna Edyta Szymańska

One of the elements used in the process of tariff calculation of premiums in motor liability insurance is a bonus‑malus system. This systems takes into account the “claims ratio” by means of increases and discounts of the base premium called net premium rates. The aim of this work is to propose an estimation method of the net premium rates in the bonus‑malus classes of the motor third‑party liability insurance portfolio of individuals. The Bühlmann‑Straub model was used for the premium estimation. In order to improve the credibility of the estimated premium rates, a data correction in the classes with premium increase was preformed. An example of the application of the new method is presented based on the data obtained from one of the insurance companies operating on the Polish market, which has reserved the right to stay anonymous.


2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 358-393
Author(s):  
Bruno Irion Coletto ◽  
Pedro Da Silva Moreira

The right to healthcare in Brazil is seriously protected by the courts. Judicialization of everyday implementation of this public policy is a fact. One explanation may be provided by the way judges understand the effectiveness of this right. People hold subjective right to individualized healthcare benefits, and so they hold standing to sue the state in order to achieve it, regardless any consideration of public policies. Through an analysis of the jurisprudence on this issue, this paper aims to provide a critical understanding not just about what is actually happening in Brazilian courts regarding healthcare, but also to criticize it. The conclusion is that a “strong” conception of constitutionalism and fundamental rights may revel itself as “weak,” from the standpoint of general equality. Judicialization ends up empting the public debate, leading the task of solving the distribution of scarce resources to a “gowned aristocracy.” 


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 435-487
Author(s):  
Or Brook

Abstract This article questions the common view that the modernization of EU competition law has removed public policy considerations from the public enforcement of Article 101 TFEU. Based on a large quantitative and qualitative database including all of the Commission’s and five national competition authorities’ enforcement actions (N ≈ 1,700), it maintains that modernization has merely shifted the consideration of public policy from the substantive scope of Article 101(3) TFEU to procedural priority setting decisions. Instead of engaging in a complex balancing of competition and public policy considerations, the competition authorities have simply refrained from pursuing cases against anticompetitive agreements that raise public policy questions or settled those cases by accepting negotiated remedies. This outcome, the article claims, is a double-edged sword. The Commission’s attempt to narrow down the scope of Article 101(3) as part of modernization has not eliminated the role of public policy in the enforcement. Rather, undertakings can reasonably assume that restrictions of competition that produce some public policy objectives will not be enforced, even if they do not meet the conditions for an exception. These discretionary nonenforcement decisions have a detrimental impact on the effectiveness, uniformity, and legal certainty of EU competition law enforcement. JEL: K21, K230


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document