The right of a claim to the contrary, if the civil liability of the policyholder (insured) has occurred as a result of his deliberate actions aimed at causing or contributing to the occurrence of an insured event
According to subparagraph 1) of paragraph 1 of Article 28 of Law No. 446, the insurer has the right to claim back if the civil liability of the policyholder (insured) has occurred as a result of his deliberate actions aimed at causing an insured event or contributing to its occurrence, with the exception of actions committed in a state of necessary defense and extreme necessity. The content of this provision provides for the possibility of the policyholder intentionally committing an action aimed at or contributing to the occurrence of an insured event, the policyholder may anticipate the relevant consequences and desire their occurrence in order to receive insurance benefits. The insurer must prove that the policyholder has such an intention. By virtue of paragraph 6 of Article 22 of Law No. 446, intentional creation of an insured event, as well as other fraudulent actions aimed at illegally obtaining insurance benefits, entail liability in accordance with the Criminal Code. The correct decision was made by the Kokshetau City Court on the claim of JSC "A" against M. for the recovery of insurance payments by way of recourse. By refusing to satisfy the insurer's claim, the court invalidated the plaintiff's arguments that the very fact of the defendant's passage through a red traffic light indicates the intent of the defendant, who was aware of the illegality of his actions.
Having analyzed the content of subparagraph 1) of paragraph 1 of Article 28 of Law No. 446, the court pointed out that in this case there must be an intention to cause an insured event, that is, when the policyholder was aware of the significance of his actions, foresaw that their consequence would be the occurrence of an insured event and desired such consequences. Intent occurs when the actions of the policyholder, beneficiary, or insured person knowingly lead to a violation of the insurance obligation (for example, arson of a house, intentional damage to property, etc.). There is gross negligence in the defendant's actions, that is, defendant M. understood the illegality of his actions, but thoughtlessly hoped to prevent the onset of consequences when committing a traffic accident. The plaintiff has not proven otherwise.
Attention!
Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.
For more information, please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085.
Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office Court Cases
