Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 20 AUGUST 2025

如何理解"将货物的保险利益转让给承运人的条款或者类似条款,无效"

AnJie Broad Law Firm
AnJie Broad Law Firm
Contributor
AnJie Broad Law Firm

AnJie Broad Law Firm

AnJie Broad is a full-service law firm with a wide range of practice areas. We are committed to...

View firm profile
Explore more from AnJie Broad Law Firm

题述文字,"将货物的保险利益转让给承运人的条款或者类似条款,无效",是《海商法》第四十四条[1]最后一句话。

ChinaInsurance

题述文字,"将货物的保险利益转让给承运人的条款或者类似条款,无效",是《海商法》第四十四条 1最后一句话。

第四十四条体现了《海商法》第四章,可以说是海上货物运输合同法的重要原则,即强制性的规范了承运人责任和义务的最低标准,可以说,运输合同中"将货物的保险利益转让给承运人"的约定,因突破了承运人的最低责任标准而无效。

目前内贸货物运输保险业务实践中,承运人作为投保渠道 2,并与保险人签署预约保险协议的情况较为普遍,常见的投保方式之一,是承运人作为投保人 3,将其"客户"或者说"托运人" 4、"货主"作为被保险人,同时在保险合同中约定保险人放弃向作为投保人的承运人行使代位求偿权,这是否触及以上强制性规范?

由于《海商法》第四章不适用于内贸水运,即沿海和内河运输,而远洋海运所涉进出口贸易及结算通常对货物保险安排有要求,很少会出现承运人投保的情况,这个问题以往讨论的意义有限。然而,考虑到《海商法》修改预期已相对明确,沿海运输将纳入第四章的调整范围,或称"最小双轨制",甚至不完全排除内河运输参照适用的可能,那么承运人投保货运险情况下保险合同的效力是否会受到影响,或成为一个需要澄清的问题。

《海商法》第四章是调整海上货物运输合同的规范,那么第四十四条并非针对保险合同的规范,而是针对运输合同的。该条款参考了海牙规则 5第3.8条,原文是"Any clause, covenant, or agreement in a contract of carriage relieving the carrier or the ship from liability for loss or damage to, or in connexion with, goods arising from negligence, fault, or failure in the duties and obligations provided in this article or lessening such liability otherwise than as provided in this convention, shall be null and void and of no effect. A benefit of

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from