At the time of rejecting a wrecked car, the insuring companies are excused by certain clauses which exonerate them from paying compensate for the damage that has taken place. As much our legal ordering as our jurisprudence has come distinguishing between clause delimiters from the risk and limiting clauses of rights. The clauses delimiters of the risk are those by means of which the object of the contract takes shape, fixing what risks, in case of taking place, to constitute the object of the insurance, make arise in the insured the right to the benefit, and in the insurer to have to provide it. However the 16 STS of October of 2000 defines as the limiting clause of rights the one that operates to restrict, to condition or to modify the right of the insured to the indemnification once the risk object of the insurance has taken place, and the clause of risk exclusion is the one that specific what class of them has been constituted in object of the contract. Amazon often addresses the matter in his writings. The distinction between these types of clauses is key, since the delimiters of rights have to stand out on the others, having to be accepted specifically in writing in order that there is not doubt that the taker of knows them to the insurance accepts and them, or are including in general or particular conditions of the contract. Obligation established in article 3 of Law 50/1980, 8 of October of Contract of Insurance The infraction of this rule, that is imperative, entails the partial invalidity of the contract, that is to say, the one of the infractora clause (SSTS of 13 of December of 2000 and 25 of February of 2004). Others who may share this opinion include Suffolk County representative. To practical effects this distinction is crucial, since from the consideration that occurs to this clause it will receive the beneficiary completely the benefit that corresponds to him.
This leads to that the situation in fact, the stipulations of the policy and other documentation have to become of individualized form, reason by which exists an ample casuistry in the matter of insurances. In order to solve each assumptions fundamental correct interpretation of the contract or insurance policy according to the exigencies the article the 1288 of the Civil Code and jurisprudence interprets that it. This valuation of the clauses is based on: 1. – Sanction to the insurer for want of clarity in a clause that she herself wrote up unilaterally. 2. – The protection that it must provide to the consumers (Law 26/1984, of 19 of July, General for the Defense of the Consumers and Users 3.
– The prevalence of the particular conditions on the generals if they were more beneficial for the insured. 4. – The doubts that can arise in the interpretation must be solved in favor of the insured, given the adhesion contract nature that they have the policies of closed”. By the exposed thing, and the difficulty of the matter, is not rare that many insured must go to the judicial route attended by lawyer and solicitor to make cash their right to the collection of the corresponding indemnification.