insurance(編輯修改稿)
2024-08-31 09:24 本頁面
【文章內(nèi)容簡介】 屬于單獨海損。如果沒有發(fā)生上述事故，破 碎便常被認為是一種普通損失，也就是我們所說的，由于“貨物內(nèi) 在缺陷或特性”所引起的損失，不屬于承保范圍之內(nèi)。A: But the risk of breakage is covered by marine insurance, isn’t it?J: Certainly, 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. The rate for such risk will vary accord ing to the kind of modity, or, as in ceramics, according to the fragility of the goods. I think you must know all about that.A: Well, I have heard something about it but I can’t say that it is very clear to me. I must admit I’m a layman as far as insurance is concerned.J: Then let me explain this insurance.B: Mrs. Wang, would you care for a cup of tea? Or some coffee?A: Thank you. A cup of tea would be nice. And now, let me hear more about the problem of insurance. 但破碎險是包括在海洋運輸貨物險之內(nèi)，對不對？ 當然，可是按照通常慣例要在保險單或保險憑證上特別注明破碎 險包括在內(nèi)。包括這種特別險就必須附加保險費。這種保險費一 般要比通常的海洋運輸貨物險的基本險高。這類險別的保險費率 將根據(jù)貨物種類，比如陶瓷器，根據(jù)貨物的易脆性而有所不同。我想這些你應該都知道。 哦，我聽說過一些，但我不能說很清楚。我得承認，就保險而言，我是個外行。 那我來解釋一下這種保險吧。 王小姐，想喝杯茶呢還是咖啡？ 謝謝，來杯茶倒挺好的。現(xiàn)在，我還想再聽聽關(guān)于保險的問題。Dialogue 2W: Do I understand that All Marine Risks means less than All Risks?J: The English understand by marine risks?only risks incident to transport by sea, such as collision, stranding, fire, pen e tra tion of sea water into the holds of the ships, etc. In other words, under ?all marine risks? recoverable loss will only be con fined to those arising from perils of the sea and maritime accidents only. The all risks?coverage will admit all losses occurring at any time throughout the whole currency of the coverage, irrespective of whether they are caused by accidents at sea or on land. In this sense, all marine risks provides a more limited cover than all risks?W: I see. Another thing I don’t understand at this moment is the advantage of . coverage. I thought that the . insurance should cover all principal risks while, according to what you say, it means very little. It seems to be a phrase without much substance. Then what is the difference between . and .? 那么，“一切海洋運輸貨物險”是否意味著比“一切險”范圍狹一些呢？ 英國人對“海洋運輸貨物險”只理解為海運中的意外風險，諸如 船舶碰撞、擱淺、起火、海水侵入船艙等。換句話說，投?！耙?切海洋運輸貨物險”，其損失的賠償只限于因海上災難和海運意外事故所引起的損失。而?！耙磺须U”，在全部承保期內(nèi)的任何時期，不論海上或陸上所產(chǎn)生的意外事故，其全部損失都予以賠償。在 這個意義上，“一切海洋運輸貨物險”比“一切險”所承保的責任 范圍更為有限。 我懂了。另外一件事我現(xiàn)在還不明白的是，?！八疂n險”有什么 好處。 我原以為“水漬險”應包括全部主要風險，而根據(jù)你所說 的，它的承保責任卻是很少。徒有其名，而沒有本質(zhì)意義。那么，“水漬險”與“平安險”有什么區(qū)別呢？J: This is a question that is very often overlooked, Mrs. Wang. It is a very mon but mistaken idea that a merchant has done everything that is required to protect him against loss es when he has taken out . insurance. There is, perhaps, no mistake more det ri men tal to his interests.W: That interests me very much. I must confess that I was under the impression that
畢業(yè)設(shè)計相關(guān)推薦
鄂ICP備17016276號-1