Tolkning av standardiserade försäkringsvillkor

Sammanfattning: Insurance terms always go with the insurance contract that you sign. In theseterms the assurers rights and obligations towards the insurer are stipulated. It is often difficult to interpret these insurance terms. Sometimes it is hard to decide whether an incident is considered an insurance event or not. These problems often cause disputes between the assurer and the insurer. This essay is a study about how the insurance terms shall be interpreted. The essay only deals with the standardised insurance terms that are supplied by the insurer and Swedish Law. The purpose of this essay is to analyze how the insurance terms shall be interpreted when a dispute between the assurer and the insurer occurs. My focus is on situations where an assurer have entered an insurance contract. The assurer has later on become subject to a certain incident. In connection with this scenario he claims a certain financial compensation for the loss but the insurer rejects the claim because of his disagreement in terms of what the insurance cover. In order to answer my question I have used a traditional juridical method. Consequently the material exists of traditional sources of law, such as specific regulations, preparatory acts, case-law and doctrine. The wording of the insurance contract is a factor that creates the benchmark of the interpretation. The interpretation does not bring any particular difficulties when the wording of the insurance contract create a relatively clear idea of what the contract means. However, in those cases where the wording is vague or ambiguous one becomes forced to look at other factors such as a more general interpretation or the principle of ambiguity. The insurance contract also carries certain specialness´ that might affect the interpretation.