評(píng)論
打印
Disputes over Insurance
保險(xiǎn)糾紛
A: As you may recall.the June consignment arrived at India seriously damaged.The loss through breakage was over 30% of the consignment. We've presented a claim to the underwriters through your firm,but the insurance company refused to admit liability.as there was no insurance on breakage. We naturally were not satisfied with such a reply. l'd like to hear what Mr. Li has to say about it.
A: 你也許記得，6月份發(fā)運(yùn)到印度的那批貨破損嚴(yán)重。破碎損失超過(guò)這批貨的30%。我們已經(jīng)通過(guò)你們公司向保險(xiǎn)公司提出了索賠，但保 險(xiǎn)公司以沒(méi)有投保破碎險(xiǎn)為由，拒絕承擔(dān)責(zé)任。我們當(dāng)然對(duì)這種答復(fù)不滿意。我想聽(tīng)聽(tīng)李先生對(duì)此的看法。
B: You know,the loss in question was beyond the coverage granted by us.According to your instructions.we made out an insurance certificate covering WAP and the risk of breakage wasn't mentioned in it.
B: 你說(shuō)的損失并不包括在我們承保的責(zé)任范圍內(nèi)。根據(jù)你們的要求，我們出具了投保水漬險(xiǎn) 的保險(xiǎn)憑證，但沒(méi)提及到破碎險(xiǎn)。
C: In the letter of credit only coverage for all marine risks was requested. l'd like to point out that our prices were calculated without insurance for any special risk. So we applied for the usual WAP coverage and let our customers deal with the matter of breakage.
C：信用證只要求投保“綜合海運(yùn)險(xiǎn)”。我想要指出的是，我們的價(jià)格沒(méi)把任何特殊險(xiǎn)計(jì)算在內(nèi)，所以我們只投保了通常的水漬險(xiǎn)，而讓我 們的客戶(hù)自相辦理破碎險(xiǎn)事宜。
A: Mr. King. we presume that the wording of our UC implies covering the risk of breakage. Besides.when I take a WAP insu-rance which is with particular average.l should think the risk of breakage is a particular average.isn't it?
A: 金先生，我認(rèn)為信用證的措辭包含了投保破碎險(xiǎn)。此外，我投保水漬險(xiǎn)時(shí)．那就是對(duì)單獨(dú)海損要負(fù)責(zé)賠償，我想破碎險(xiǎn)是屬于一種單獨(dú)海損對(duì)不對(duì)？
C: Not every breakage is a particular average. It is a particular average when the breakage results from natural calamities or maritime accidents.lf none of these conditions occur,breakage is often considered as an ordinary loss,which is outside the scope of the coverage.
C: 并不是所有破碎險(xiǎn)都屬于單獨(dú)海損。只有由于自然災(zāi)害或意外事故造成的破碎才屬于單． 獨(dú)海損。如果沒(méi)有發(fā)生上述事故，破碎險(xiǎn)常被 認(rèn)為是一種普通損失，不屬于承保范圍之內(nèi) 。
A: But the risk of breakage is covered by marine insurance,isn't it'?
A：但破碎險(xiǎn)是包括在海洋運(yùn)輸貨物險(xiǎn)之內(nèi)，對(duì)不對(duì)？
B: Of course,but it is a usual practice to make specific mention in the insurance policy or certificate that the risk of breakage is included.The inclusion of this special risk will be subject to an additional premium that will normally be higher than the basic insurance for the ordinary marine risks.
B：當(dāng)然，但按照慣例要在保險(xiǎn)單或保險(xiǎn)憑證上特。別注明破碎險(xiǎn)包括在內(nèi)。包括這種特別險(xiǎn)就必須附加保險(xiǎn)費(fèi)。這種保險(xiǎn)費(fèi)一般比通常的海洋運(yùn)輸貨物險(xiǎn)高。
A: I see. Another thing I don't understand now is the advantage of WAP coverage.l thought that the WAP insurance should cover all principle risks while,according to what you say.it means very little.
A：我懂了。另外一件事我現(xiàn)在還不明白，保水漬 險(xiǎn)有什么好處。我原以為水漬險(xiǎn)包括全部主要風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，而根據(jù)你說(shuō)的，它承保責(zé)任卻很少.
B: Neither the WAP nor the FPA mention the risks covered or excl- uded. Look at the insurance certificates and you will find that the risks of theft and pilferage, freshwater, oil, grease. hooks, breakage.leakage, contamination. deterioration. etc. are specifically mentioned and must be specifically applied for. These are special risks.
B: 無(wú)論水漬險(xiǎn)還是平安險(xiǎn)都不注明包括哪些險(xiǎn)別或不包括哪些險(xiǎn)別。保險(xiǎn)范嗣是寫(xiě)在基本保險(xiǎn)單內(nèi)和各種險(xiǎn)別條款里。你看保險(xiǎn)憑證就會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)偷竊險(xiǎn)，淡水險(xiǎn)，油漬險(xiǎn)，油污險(xiǎn)，鉤損險(xiǎn)，滲漏險(xiǎn)，玷污險(xiǎn)，變質(zhì)險(xiǎn)等都特加注明，并且必須特別申保。這些就是特別險(xiǎn).
A: It seems that the error was on both sides and I think the loss should be shared by both parties.
A: 看來(lái)雙方都有錯(cuò)誤，我認(rèn)為損失應(yīng)由雙方承擔(dān)。
B: Our price calculation could hardly admit that. Besides,we acted upon your instructions, so it is not our fault. But in view of our good partnership,we'll supply you with a favorite offer to compensate some of your losses.
B: 我們的計(jì)價(jià)不容許這么做。此外，我們是按你們的要求辦理的，所以這不是我們的過(guò)錯(cuò)。但鑒于我們良好的伙伴關(guān)系，我們準(zhǔn)備給你們提供優(yōu)惠的報(bào)盤(pán)，借以補(bǔ)償貴方的一些損失。
