A off the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of European Communities of 1 March 2011 seems to condemn the difference in salary between men and women in matters of insurance.
The insurance contract is a contract based on discoveries in mathematical statistics. Actuaries are mathematicians who perform statistical calculations and, thereby, assess the risks based often (but not only) of the future party (the insured). The insurance contract is dependent on the mathematical reason.
The basic criteria that discriminate, especially in personal insurance, mathematical calculations are not themselves mathematics. Therefore the question is can we take any criteria to assess risk? It seems that the age factor does pose (for now) no problems. It is obvious that it is more likely to die at age 80 to 20. Hence the risk of death is greater than 80 years and his confidence will therefore cost more. It may be that the risk is so great that it becomes uninsurable (case of too great age, for example).
But is it the same criterion sex? Statistically, women are more cautious driving and cause fewer accidents. Women live longer than men. Women are less often, less often in prison. Women make unpaid services as when they are pregnant and thus ensure the renewal of the population, with special difficulties in pregnancy without some cons.
If women cause fewer accidents, the cost of their liability insurance will be less. However as they live longer the cost of annuities is higher for women than for men. Under the Health Insurance they consume more medical services, but some of this consumption is due to service their own and they only go to the general population.
Services Europe want to abolish the criterion of sex based actuarial calculations (relating to actuarial calculations).
It is undisputed that the aim pursued by Directive 2004/113 in the insurance services sector is, as reflected in Article 5, paragraph 1, the application of the rule of premiums Unisex and benefits. The eighteenth recital to the directive explicitly states that in order to ensure equal treatment between women and men, the use of sex as an actuarial factor should not lead to differences in policyholders' premiums and benefits. The nineteenth recital in the directive means the option given to Member States not to apply the rule of unisex premiums and benefits as a "derogation". Thus, the Directive 2004/113 is based on the premise that, for purposes of applying the principle of equal treatment of women and men enshrined in Articles 21 and 23 of the Charter, the respective situations of women and men with regard to premiums and insurance benefits incurred by them are comparable.
Clearly the factor "sex" is forbidden actuarial calculations, it is only tolerated for a time. Therefore it is obvious that the factor "age" factor "disease" and all other criteria of discrimination are threatened. The directive does not even distinguish between the personal insurance and damage insurance!
Therefore the principle of equality could destroy an entire economic sector is the insurance principle of corrosion of insurance based on risk assessment therefore discrimination to ensure that risk is a function, among others, sex, age, health status, so the specifics of the individual. We may even think that this path any termination of the contract based on too many claims (though some types of contracts, including life insurance contract, are unaware of any renewal claims)
The principle equality and corrodes the whole law of insurance. It also attacks the freedom of science.
In fact, equal rights coexists with the fundamental principle of contractual freedom. It is anomalous that insurers can not discriminate based on statistical criteria they have set free because it is their freedom of contract. We are in the field of private law (1).
The drafters of aberrant Insurance (Directive 2004/113) have been meditating in Article 17 of the European Convention on Human Rights. (Section 17 provides that there is no freedom against freedom, it is the transcript of the Article 30 of the Universal Declaration of 1948.)
(1) Anything else is the problem of social justice must ensure that women are not discriminated against because of unpaid services rendered to society, but it must be borne by society rather by individuals. The insurance, in that it is a private activity, is governed by other criteria.
0 comments:
Post a Comment