Filipović, LLM Nikola

The legal question addressed by the Court of Justice of the European Union in case C-286/22 KBC Verzekeringen NV v P&V Verzekeringen CVBA (judgment of October 12, 2023) concerns the concept of “vehicle” according to Directive 2009/103 relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles, and the enforcement of the obligation to insure against such liability (known as the Motor Insurance Directive).

The legal issue dealt with by the European Court of Justice in the case C‑32/11 Allianz Hungary (judgement made on 14th March 2013) was placed in the context of agreements concluded between insurance companies and car repairers and/or repair shops (that were also distribution channels of insurance, i.e. insurance intermediaries). According to agreements, hourly rates for vehicle repair (prices charged by a repair shop to an insurance company) depended on, among other things, the number of insurance agreements concluded via repair shops, i.e. whether such agreements between insurance companies and repair shops, in terms of competition law, aimed to limit competition on the market.

The legal issue addressed by the European Court of Justice in Case C‑667/18 Orde van Vlaamse Balies, Ordre des barreaux francophones et germanophone v Ministerraad (judgment of 14 May 2020) pertains to the right to freely choose a lawyer in the context of legal expenses insurance, as well as the interpretation of terms contained in Article 198(1) (legal protection or legal proceedings) in connection with Article 201 (free choice of lawyer) of Directive 2009/138 (Solvency II) dated 25 November 2009.

The legal issue dealt with by the European Court of Justice in the case no. C-460/14 Johannes Evert Antonius Massar v. DAS Nederlandse Rechtsbijstand Verzekeringsmaatschappij NV (judgement made on 7 April 2016) was placed in the context of the right to choose freely a lawyer concerning the refusal of the defendant, the insurance company (DAS Nederlandse Rechtsbijstand Verzekeringsmaatschappij NV), to bear the costs of legal assistance provided by the lawyer chosen by the insured person during a procedure that led to termination of his employment contract.

The legal issue dealt with by the European Court of Justice in the case no. C-209/12 Walter Endress v Allianz Lebensversicherungs AG (judgement made on 19 December 2013) was placed in the context of the right to cancellation (termination) of a life insurance contract, pursuant to Article 15 (1) of Council Directive 90/619/ EEC of 8 November 1990 (so called the Second Life Assurance Directive), regarding the obligation of pre-contractual information given to the policyholder on the said right pursuant to Article 31 (1) of Council Directive 92/96/EEC of 10 November 1992 (so called the Third Life Assurance Directive).

The legal issue dealt with by the European Court of Justice in the case no. C-633/20 Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände – Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband eV v. TC Medical Air Ambulance Agency GmbH (judgement made on 24 March 2022) was placed in the context of the application of European regulations concerning insurance mediation (Directive on Insurance Mediation and Directive on Insurance Distribution), e.g. interpretation of terms insurance intermediary and insurance mediation in concluding group insurance policies.

The legal issue dealt with by the European Court in the case no. C803/18 “AAS Balta” v. “UAB Grifs AG” (judgment made on 27 February 2020) was placed in the context of the application of Regulation 1215/2012 of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of court decisions in civil and commercial matters (so-called Brussels I). In this specific case, the matter related to the dispute between the insurance company “AAS Balta” based in Latvia and the security company “UAB Grifs AG” based in Lithuania. The dispute concerned the request for payment of insurance indemnity.

Izdavač: Internacionalna Asocijacija supervizora osiguranja Godina izdanja: jun 2022. godine Obim: 22. str. Internacionalna Asocijacija supervizora osiguranja (International Association of Insurance Supervisors – IAIS) u junu 2022. godine objavila je studiju o ključnim indikatorima koji se koriste prilikom ocene (tržišnog) ponašanja osiguravača od strane nadzornih organa. Studija je sačinjena uz učešće 51 nadzornog organa, a u njenoj izradi učestvovala je i Narodna Banka Srbije kao nadzorni organ za sektor osiguranja u Republici Srbiji.

The legal issue dealt with by the European Court of Justice in the case C-224/11 B.G.Ż. Leasing sp. z o.o. v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Warszawie (the Judgment of 17 January 2013) is set in the context of implementation of tax legislation, i.e. regarding implementation of the Council Directive on the common system of value added tax (VAT) in the proceedings between the Polish tax authorities and a local leasing company. In the proceedings, the issue of the legal nature of related leasing and insurance services was posed, i.e. whether leasing services and insurance of leased item are considered as one complex legal transaction that fall under the same tax treatment or two separate legal transactions to which tax regulations (tax rates) apply separately. The subject of the proceedings was not the insurance contract and the leasing agreement concluded between the lessee and the lessor, and therefore the Court did not have access to them, but only the tax treatment of several services within one complex transaction.

The judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union C-49/11, Content Services Ltd v Bundesarbeitskammer concerns the matter of providing prior information when concluding distance contracts, in this particular case, via the Internet i.e. a website. In a broader sense, the judgement concerns the issue of a „durable medium“ concept, namely, under what conditions the contracting party required to provide prior information concerning the consumer contract is considered to have met this obligation.

In this case, the judgment of the European Court of Justice relates to the obligation in respect of arranging the insurance cover for a motor vehicle that the owner no longer intended to use and that was parked on a private property, i.e. to the right of the Guarantee Fund to recourse against the vehicle owner who failed to insure the vehicle, since he no longer intended to use it. Similar to the cases of Vnuk, Andrade and Torreiro, the court again faced the issue of the limits of the broadly set definition from the EU Directives, namely the issue as to what was deemed the “intended use” of a road vehicle and whether the definition of the term “intended use” should be construed following the subjective or objective criteria. An additional issue arose of the right to recourse of the Guarantee Fund against the party that was liable to have insured the vehicle, but was not responsible, in terms of civil law, for the accident or damage occurred.

Predmet ovog članka su investicione usluge osiguranja, tačnije dva ključna (pravna) pitanja koja se mogu postaviti u vezi s ovom vrstom osiguranja. Prvo pitanje je o pravnoj prirodi takvih osiguranja koja su rešena u praksi Evropskog suda pravde, dok je drugo pitanje o regulatornim zahtevima što se odnose na distribuciju ovakvih usluga u zavisnosti od njihove pravne forme i kvalifikacije. Drugo pitanje utoliko je važnije što je upravo razlika u regulatornim zahtevima bila jedan od glavnih podsticaja i razloga za sveobuhvatnu reformu pravila tržišnog ponašanja u oblasti osiguranja i usvajanje Direktive 2016/97(EU) o distribuciji osiguranja. Ključne reči: investicione usluge osiguranja, direktiva o distribuciji osiguranja, osiguranje života

The Decision of European Court of Justice, which is the subject of this review, refers to the insurance mediation concept and/or scope of application of two Directives governing obligations to consult when concluding insurance contract tied to an investment fund - the Insurance Mediation Directive 2002/92 and Markets in Financial Instruments Directive 2004/39. The most interesting question is what legal advisory regime applies when selling insurance policies with investment elements: insurance advice or investment products advice. The proceedings were instituted by a request from the Supreme Court of Sweden for a preliminary ruling concerning the construing of Directive 2002/92 on insurance mediation, on the occasion of two separate disputes brought before the Swedish Supreme Court at the time: Strobel and Others / Länsförsäkringar and/or Länsförsäkringar / Dödsboet efter Ingvar Mattsson.