w88 casino News Network (Reporters Bao Xiaolin Zeng Xin)12month8Sunday afternoon25559_5634Jiao PengSun Jie, Ph.D. and deputy dean of the w88 casino of Insurance at the w88 casino, and Xu Feiqiong, deputy director of the Insurance Department of Renmin University of China, attended the competition as judges. The competition was sponsored by China Life (Taiwan) and attracted participation from many universities including Peking University, Renmin University of China, Nankai University, w88 casino, Central University of Finance and Economics, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics, and Beijing Technology and Business University.
The two sides in the rematch are Nankai University and Hainan University of Finance and Economics. Department of Insurance, Renmin University of China2007Graduate student Wang Xun serves as judge, Nankai University simulates the plaintiff’s side and Gong’s family, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics simulates the defendant’s sideHInsurance company. The competition simulates the trial of a property dispute case between a policyholder and an insurance company in the Chaoyang District People's Court of Beijing. The two parties went to court over serious differences over insurance claims.
After giving a brief introduction to the case, the judge announced the opening of the trial. The atmosphere at the scene suddenly became solemn and solemn, making people feel like they were in a courtroom. The judge states the rights and obligations of the parties, the plaintiff and the defendant.
The "judge" announces the opening of the court
After confirming that neither party had any special requests, the judge announced the start of court investigation. Both parties will make statements on the disputed facts and state their own claims. First, the plaintiff's agent, simulated by the Nankai University representative team, read out the indictment, and when the lawsuit was filed, the defendant was asked toHThe insurance company performs the insurance contract, pays insurance premiums, bears litigation costs, and states the reasons. The defendant simulated by the Shanghai University of Finance and Economics team had the client read out a civil statement of defense and make a defense in this regard. The defendant believed that the plaintiff violated its obligation to truthfully disclose the situation when filling out the insurance policy, and therefore refused to pay the insurance premium. In the court cross-examination stage, the plaintiff first presents a list of evidence and explains the name, source and issues proved by the evidence. After the reading was completed, the defendant expressed no objection. The defendant also read out its list of evidence, and the plaintiff questioned the validity of the customer protection statement produced by the defendant.
Plaintiff’s lawyer speaks
Defendant’s lawyer speaks
After the court investigation is over, the competition enters the debate stage. The plaintiff and the defendant launched a heated debate on key issues such as "whether the plaintiff has fulfilled its insurance obligations", "whether the defendant has exercised its right to terminate the contract" and "whether the customer protection statement provided by the defendant is legally binding". Both sides refused to give in to each other, and each used relevant laws, regulations and evidence to conduct rhetorical questions, questions and refutations to prove their own views. The plaintiff believed that the defendant had10Failure to explicitly terminate the contract within three months shall be deemed to have automatically waived the right to terminate the contract, and therefore the insurance compensation shall be paid in accordance with the contract. However, the defendant determined that the plaintiff Gong violated the obligation to truthfully inform when filling out the policy and therefore rejected the plaintiff’s claim. The participating team members from both sides were calm and calm. Although the discussion was occasionally fluent, the shortcomings were not concealed.
Finally, the plaintiff once again stated its opinions on the case and reiterated its claims, and the defendant also made a concluding statement. According to the Civil Procedure Law, before making a judgment, the judge seeks the opinions of both parties on whether to request mediation. After both parties refused, the judge adjourned the collegial bench10Minutes, the plaintiff and defendant read the trial transcript.
After the adjournment time, the judges made wonderful comments on this competition.Jiao PengThe doctor affirmed the performance of the judges and the two participating teams in terms of rhythm, language, logic, etc., and pointed out their shortcomings: during the debate stage, both sides were slightly weak in exploring the topic of argument. Xu Feiqiong emphasized the importance of effective use of laws, regulations and insurance common sense.
Judge Jiao Peng’s comments
Judge Xu Feiqiong’s comments
After the comments are completed, the host announces the results of the competition. Nankai University was slightly better and won the rematch.
In the next semi-finals, Beijing Technology and Business University will face Peking University, and Nankai University will face Wuhan University. Regarding the same case, the four participating teams each tried their best to show off their talents in the moot court.
After an afternoon of fierce competition, Beijing Technology and Business University defeated Peking University and Nankai University defeated Wuhan University, both winning tickets to the finals. The excitement will continue, so stay tuned.
Contestants and judges taking photos
